Coflash: It's not as if it wasn't expected, it's just disappointing. Like I said, it's happened many times before to great games.

Mafia 2
Dragon Age 2
Mass Effect 2
FEAR 2
Operation Flashpoint 2
Deus Ex 2
Fable 2
Far Cry 2
Bioshock 2
Crysis 2

See a pattern? And that's only the sequels I could think of off the top of my head. How some of the mighty have fallen. The Witcher 2 has done the same thing, maybe not to the same degree as others, but still.

It usually takes a few months before any real understanding sets in with the masses, but by then any PC gamers concerns will be dwindled by the sheer amount of console gamers happy to play anything served to them. The visuals alone will probably be enough to satisfy their shallow requirements of any game.

I guess no developer is immune to this sort of thing, I honestly thought these guys were different though, judging from all the pre-release interviews and trailers.

agga11: Mouse1 = fast style
Mouse2 = strong style

Group fighting is a talent in the melee tree.

cyricus: Well, perhaps it is just me, but i believe both combat systems (Witcher 1/2) to be inherently flawed and ... well, simply dumbed down.

That is compared to Gothic 1/2.

See, i've been playing (C)RPGs for a looong, long time. It all started on the VC20 (although there weren't any RPGs i can can remember), C64 (Ultima 2+, Martian Dreams, Savage Empire & Co.), Amiga (Eye of the Beholder, Dungeon Master) and finally the PC (Ultima Underworld, Lands of Lore & Co., AD&D Gold Box).

Yes, Ultima Underworld which had a pretty neat combat system, depending on weapon and armor used, mouse skill, movement.

The next big step was Gothic (2). Combat which was really depending on your skill to anticipate your enemy's movements.

That was the time when consoles managed to establish themselves on the European market. A steady decline regarding complexness in games started. Due to the controller-depending consoles UIs are constantly simplified, e.g. instead of large inventory overviews we have to handly single column, scroll-down inventories, well inventories which can be easily managed with 3-4 buttons. No longer are developers making (good) use of the keyboard or mouse.

Then there's graphics ... oh well. Don't misunderstand me, graphics in TW2 are amazing (provided your hardware is top-notch), however even here we see console related problems. What am i talking about? Well, the illusion of freedom in the world. There are only so many paths you're allowed to travel, no jumping, no free climbing. Why? Because consoles wouldn't be able to handle something like this without more memory and cpu power.

Next: Motivaton for Exploration. There's no need to anymore in most games these times. Most secrets are obvious and you cannot really hide anything due to the aforementioned limited free movement in the game world. You really can't face hard enemies early in the game (even if you wanted to). It seems there is a constant need to cater to the crowd who doesn't want to feel challenged in a game. Remember the Ultima series. You were able to explore nearly the whole world even without doing step 1,2,3 and collecting item XYZ first. Of course, constant deaths were your companions back then. However, there was ALWAYS the possibility to try it.

When playing TW2 i really have no need to explore anything because at one point there is sidequest A which will take me to point B. Example: That cave right in front of Floatsam - no need to explore it in the beginning because sidequest A will take you there at one point. The same applies to every single location the game. There is no need to explore because the game will take your hand and lead you there, so to speak. A modern example for a game that allows exploration would be Risen.

Btw, anyone remember the time when were able to actually "bake" bread in a game. Ultima comes to my mind. Back then you even had to eat in the game. Made it more realistic for me, but whatever - those times are a thing of the past it seems.

I can understand the need to reach maximum potential (money-wise), but why the constant need to simplify everything? That is what makes me sad, especially as i still remember a time when games defined themselves by complexity and the need to study a manual before.

Don't misunderstand me though. I still believe TW2 to be a very good game, especially compared to DA2, Mass Effect and Mass Effect2 or Gothic 4 (*shudder*), but there are certain points which could have made it a better game, a defining milestone even.

Maybe some things will change with the release of the next generation of consoles. So far however - at least in my opinion - PC gaming can't really evolve if held back by the limitation of consoles.


PS: Sorry for any typos of grammar mistakes. English is my second language ;)

Gwydion777: I guess the team was so proud of their new baby, they overshowed the nice bits, without showing it's sixth toe... And that's what happens when you expect so much: disappointment. Of course it's different to TW1. That doesn't mean it's better or worse. Just different.

They must also have used the AV system here. If you want to appeal to everyone, you end up appealing to no one in particular, lol!

And I remember al the bugs and hassle when TW1 first came out. They resolved that quite nicely. Keep the faith!!!

Coflash: Bugs will be fixed, the game at it's core cannot be. There will be no miracle patch that will revitalize combat, nor will CDProjekt acknowledge any of these complaints.

Coflash: Please.

Don't change the argument to more PC vs console drivel. I have 6 consoles, the difference is, I like my console games to remain on console, the sole reason I was interested in The Witcher in the first place is that it was a PC RPG. I WANT a PC RPG, as do many other people, if you're really confused as to why people expected that at this point then perhaps you're in the wrong thread. There are plenty of others praising it, overlooking the differences simply because they have low standards.

Any sense of entitlement can be chalked up to the fact that I paid for the game and I was promised the experience would not be dumbed down, I was promised it was specifically targeted towards the PC with the control scheme aimed at a gamepad. That was fine. How often do you pay for things that you don't want, yet remain satisfied? Or in your mind does this somehow only apply to games?

Fact: it's simplified. Fact: it's dumbed down. Fact: it is more console centric than PC. Using the powers of deduction, see if you can see how CD Projekt have used the same formula many other devs have in order to put sales above making an interesting game - targeted at the platform they said it would be.

It's fine they would gloat about PC sales with the Witcher 1 right? Commenting on Dragon Age 1/2 as if they were not up to scratch, yet following many of their decisions with their own sequel in relation to streamlining combat and the inventory.

My argument is presented by what is in the game, all you're doing is playing semantics, defending something only because it appeals to you. Stop being butthurt and look at it objectively, because for once, that would be so refreshing just to see a single person do that. Or not. In that case you can look forward to TW3 getting in line with the rest of the dumbed down western RPG's. Yay.

Zhijn: I dont know if id call it "dumbed down" except maybe the sword styles/fighting, but TW2 has definitely been made with the console in mind.

Likely so they didnt have to revamp the hole system once they begin to develope it for a console release.

But imo that dosnt make it a bad game.
I personally quite like it as it is, tho i do miss the various fighting styles TW1 offered (not the combo click per say, but the styles!).