The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings ann.

Oh, btw, to anyone complaining about lack of builds in Witcher 1. It's Witcher. He isn either mage nor a fighter. He uses both, and it can't be done differently, or it would be lorebreaking. So, devs had to force people to spend points both in magic like in combat.

And I'd strongly recommend to read the books by Andrzej Sapkowski... you'd realise why he comes without memory, and all that jazz.
 
krameriffic said:
Shouldn't we be complaining about how he's spinning around and jumping vigorously into the air and swinging his sword like it's made out of paper mache during the combat?

Oh wait this isn't the DA2 thread.
Click to expand...

Has a lot to do with how fluid it looks. DA 2 combat is fast, but not fluid. TW2 combat is fluid.
 
krameriffic said:
Shouldn't we be complaining about how he's spinning around and jumping vigorously into the air and swinging his sword like it's made out of paper mache during the combat?

Oh wait this isn't the DA2 thread.
Click to expand...

I have to ask have you ever read one of Sapkowski Witcher books ?
 
I haven't read the books, but isn't a witcher basically a mutant? Nevertheless there is real physical inertia involved in the swing animations as opposed to DA2. (not purposely trying to put down DA2)


*spoilery below*


Did Geralt 'die' by the peasant pitchfork to be revived before or after becoming a witcher?
 
Last edited:
Well, Witchers were human children, who were mutated, and then trained to be kilers of monsters. They were supposed not to get themselves into politics and human vs human wars.


*spoiler*


Well, technically noone knows if he died or not. It ends almost like Arturian legends with Geralt and his beloved Yennefer being put on boat, and then they woke up in some other place. It is still discussed between fans of Witcher, what really happened ;)

ALso Sapkowski officially said, that gems are not canon, and although they are ok, they are not official continuation of Geralt books.
 
Parmenides said:
I haven't read the books, but isn't a witcher basically a mutant? Nevertheless there is real physical inertia involved in the swing animations as opposed to DA2. (not purposely trying to put down DA2)


*spoilery below*


Did Geralt 'die' by the peasant pitchfork to be revived before or after becoming a witcher?
Click to expand...

Long years after he became a Witcher.

In the timeline of book which are set few years before game creation of Witchers was lost technology class tech.

Witcher recruitment goes like this:

- witchers collect kids (usually as a return of favour for saving someones life)
- those kids are trained and their growth is supported by various drugs
- after some point in the training they go through mutation known as "trial of grass" many of them die in this and small succesfull part gain super human senses and psyhique.

But after a certain happening in the past (similar to witch hunts of our history) castle where witchers train have been burned by angry mob and during that time knowledge of how to make trial of grass has been lost.
 
Still waiting for WabeWalker to show up and tell us how doctored the video is. The combat animations aren't the two frame "swings" of DA2 where the protagonist does a 15 foot ass-rocket slide into the enemy before vanishing into thin air and reappearing on the other side of the battle. They are quick but smooth and nothing in them suggests they can't be physically accomplished. In other words, one games makes it easier to willingly suspend disbelief.

Many of us who played DA:O expected that series to be Bioware's old-school classic RPG return to its roots. Even one of the designers thought so... he quit Bioware because management diverged the series from what they were expecting to make with the second installment. No doubt DA2 will have a fine story, but we've come to expect more from certain developers. The artwork and combat feel DA2 has been massively altered and not everyone is pleased with that. I have the feeling that most of us that feel this way have no problem with such changes in a new franchise.
 
Those screen shots do look photoshopped. The video looks good though but whoever was playing loved to roll around a lot.
 
Pleasantly surprised by the graphics in that video. Hope the release looks even better.

Btw wabe, you couldn't tell a difference in the power of your character as you leveled? Because I definitely noticed when I started to 1 short drowners with the Group Stance selected and Igni starts to do a ton of damage later on.
 
amazing video. it just solidified taking off a few days of work for the release of this game. the combat looks even better than the first game. and the music is awesome too - hopefully that is in-game music we hear during the video.
 
Andrew_Carr said:
Pleasantly surprised by the graphics in that video. Hope the release looks even better.

Btw wabe, you couldn't tell a difference in the power of your character as you leveled? Because I definitely noticed when I started to 1 short drowners with the Group Stance selected and Igni starts to do a ton of damage later on.
Click to expand...

Yeah, later in the game you can end battles extremely quickly with group stance, heads and limbs flying everywhere. Then again, Wabe tends to exaggerate the problems of the games he dislikes, and make out every game he likes to be game of the decade. Just ignore him.
 
The new GUI is greatly-improved. For some reason, the original game's GUI always bothered me: this one is clean and straight to the point.

I think I'll go with the ULTRA-PREMIUM SUPER DUPER collector's edition on this one.
 
Also, I hate to say it, because I really did want this game to be good, but I can't stand it in RPGs when you have to resort to rolling your character on the ground.

That's what the stats should be all about. You pump all those points into the various skills so that you don't have to roll around. The combat looks ridiculous. All the guy is doing is striking with this sword and then rolling around.

What's so great about that?
 
WabeWalker said:
Also, I hate to say it, because I really did want this game to be good, but I can't stand it in RPGs when you have to resort to rolling your character on the ground.

That's what the stats should be all about. You pump all those points into the various skills so that you don't have to roll around. The combat looks ridiculous. All the guy is doing is striking with this sword and then rolling around.

What's so great about that?
Click to expand...

Looks like great gameplay for a console game!
 
WabeWalker said:
Also, I hate to say it, because I really did want this game to be good, but I can't stand it in RPGs when you have to resort to rolling your character on the ground.

That's what the stats should be all about. You pump all those points into the various skills so that you don't have to roll around. The combat looks ridiculous. All the guy is doing is striking with this sword and then rolling around.

What's so great about that?
Click to expand...

From the video you can block. Rolling is a style choice to some degree. He didn't need to roll that much. However in the Gothic 4 demo I couldn't get the block to work... but rolling.... I did lots of that.

You do seem determined to hate this game. Did you get far enough in the original to even see your character become more powerful in later levels? I like character choice too, that is a negative but you really can't have everything in a game unless you make it yourself. It just seems like you're nitpicking to try to find flaws... much like you see people nitpicking against games you defend.
 
Last edited:
WabeWalker said:
Also, I hate to say it, because I really did want this game to be good, but I can't stand it in RPGs when you have to resort to rolling your character on the ground.

That's what the stats should be all about. You pump all those points into the various skills so that you don't have to roll around. The combat looks ridiculous. All the guy is doing is striking with this sword and then rolling around.

What's so great about that?
Click to expand...

ArcaniA. Let the hypocrisy commence!
 
WabeWalker said:
Also, I hate to say it, because I really did want this game to be good, but I can't stand it in RPGs when you have to resort to rolling your character on the ground.

That's what the stats should be all about. You pump all those points into the various skills so that you don't have to roll around. The combat looks ridiculous. All the guy is doing is striking with this sword and then rolling around.

What's so great about that?
Click to expand...

It does look a bit silly, but it seems mostly optional. I like a deep and action packed combat system in my RPGs, it seems a lot of people like the stat packing 1 click combat with cooldown timers on abilities in their RPGs, personally I'd love an RPG with a combat system akin to Ninja Gaiden (the one on the original Xbox, I haven't played the others so I can't speak for them).

If I wanted slow boring combat where I just click little squares to queue up abilities and combat was based purely on how good your stats are (or your ability to glitch the AI), I'd play an MMO.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
ArcaniA. Let the hypocrisy commence!
Click to expand...

Nope. Totally incorrect.

In Arcania my melee fighter grew extremely powerful. The combos, along with the armor, and my stun attack, made it so that I fought head on.

The only time I ever rolled around was when I was playing the demo, when I had no idea what I was doing.

Anybody who faced combat in Arcania by rolling around didn't level up properly. Not the game's fault if you don't know how to play it properly.
 
The dodge roll is right up there with the double jump on the short list of gaming's all time greatest moves. The dodge roll is amazing. Rock and roll.
 
I'll take an ACTIVE combat system that actually allows you to block/dodge over a "numbers only" system where you hit auto attack and watch it all unfold without moving your hand anyday.

WAs fun back in the day, but i like my rpgs to provide me with some player skill to go along with rpg elements as well.
 
Tudz said:
It does look a bit silly, but it seems mostly optional. I like a deep and action packed combat system in my RPGs, it seems a lot of people like the stat packing 1 click combat with cooldown timers on abilities in their RPGs, personally I'd love an RPG with a combat system akin to Ninja Gaiden (the one on the original Xbox, I haven't played the others so I can't speak for them).

If I wanted slow boring combat where I just click little squares to queue up abilities and combat was based purely on how good your stats are (or your ability to glitch the AI), I'd play an MMO.
Click to expand...

Stiler said:
I'll take an ACTIVE combat system that actually allows you to block/dodge over a "numbers only" system where you hit auto attack and watch it all unfold without moving your hand anyday.

WAs fun back in the day, but i like my rpgs to provide me with some player skill to go along with rpg elements as well.
Click to expand...

Amen and amen

WabeWalker said:
Nope. Totally incorrect.

In Arcania my melee fighter grew extremely powerful. The combos, along with the armor, and my stun attack, made it so that I fought head on.

The only time I ever rolled around was when I was playing the demo, when I had no idea what I was doing.

Anybody who faced combat in Arcania by rolling around didn't level up properly. Not the game's fault if you don't know how to play it properly.
Click to expand...

And obviously in that video it is clear that he was at later levels and had no other option than to roll around because the Geralt in the Witcher 2 is too weak at later levels and must resort to constant rolling. Right? :p You wouldn't be a little too judgmental on a game you haven't yet played yet would you? *poke* *poke*
 
AceCR42 said:
Then again, Wabe tends to exaggerate the problems of the games he dislikes, and make out every game he likes to be game of the decade. Just ignore him.
Click to expand...

THIS. Better hope he doesn't happen to have a random hard-on for whatever mediocre/below average game you criticize because it will have him QQing for weeks.
 
Now you are judging a game for which there isn't even a demo out for, unlike the folks who HAVE demoed DA2. Very interesting, no? Didn't you cry out in the other thread that people with negative opinions should butt out of the game's thread? Do as I say, not as I do?

I liked both DA:O and The Witcher, what we've seen of the sequels so far has left me more impressed with the direction Witcher2 has taken and I've been following both closely. People are going to come to different conclusions than you, and they have every right to express themselves one way or the other.
 
Last edited:
I've forgotten... are the decisions from Witcher 1 going to carry over to Witcher 2? I think it was mentioned in a video but I can't recall when or where.
 
Ryom said:
I've forgotten... are the decisions from Witcher 1 going to carry over to Witcher 2? I think it was mentioned in a video but I can't recall when or where.
Click to expand...

Yes they do but no info on how much it will change.
 
If The Witcher 2 was an EA game, Walker's nose would be firmly up its ass.

Proof?

WabeWalker said:
I have to count myself in here. Damn, I was so cold on this game before the demo - the idea of pre odering DA2 was foreign to my policy, as Wodehouse would say. Oh well, I'm glad I was wrong. Now I get to give another $20 to EA - yay!
Click to expand...

Ignore him.
 
Plague_Injected said:
If The Witcher 2 was an EA game, Walker's nose would be firmly up its ass.
Click to expand...

His nose will join the rest of his head some day.

Provided I don't have to roll around a bunch in combat I'm very much looking forward to TW2.

Combat looks less twitch click repeat ad nauseum this time around.
 
Sarcasm.

Look it up please.

When I wrote, yay, I get to give EA another twenty dollars, that was sarcasm. Jesus. Are you even serious?
 
WabeWalker said:
Sarcasm.

Look it up please.

When I wrote, yay, I get to give EA another twenty dollars, that was sarcasm. Jesus. Are you even serious?
Click to expand...

Give me an example where you've openly condemned a game released by EA.

Your post seems far less sarcastic now, doesn't it?
 
Just beat the first one. About to start my second play through. I went with Triss and a build of magic. Igni maxed out is a blast. :) This time will go Shani/Melee. I was also nice. Not this time. lol.

I really can't wait for this to come out. I haven't been this into a game since MS1 or BG2. :)

Do most people prefer melee w/ potions or the magic route?
 
Plague_Injected said:
Give me an example where you've openly condemned a game released by EA.

Your post seems far less sarcastic now, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

The original Dead Space turned me off, and I uninstalled it after chapter five, though admittedly I did return to it with a new perspective later on.

The original Dragon Age didn't exactly blow me away.

I'm not a big admirer of Battlefield 2.

There was a Need For Speed game recently which I absolutely detested. Hot Pursuit? It was bad. I also can't stand the Burnout games.

Recent EA titles that I liked. Dead Space 2, and The Dragon Age 2 demo. Mass Effect 2 was alright - but why am I at the halfway point and struggling to complete it? So what other EA titles do I like? There must be others but I can't think of any right now.

Nope, not an EA fanboy. Now, Ubisoft on the other hand - yes, I tend to like a lot of the titles they produce, though I don't exactly know why. I just do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top