It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
The Witcher 2BIG ANNOUCEMENT TODAY FROM CDR(131 posts)(131 posts)
(131 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
This is my favourite topic
Posted June 02, 2011
i played and enjoyed TW1, and thought it had a nice UI.

from what i've played of TW2, it also has a nice UI. i miss being able to toggle between inventory and quests and character development, but other than that, it hasn't stood out as bad in any way.

you know what a bad, console-designed UI is? Vanquish:

http://media.giantbomb.com/uploads/1/10459/1651010-vanquish_screenshot_super.jpg
Posted June 02, 2011
avatar
DarN: Game design is an art. Their art suffered due to an UI intended for both platforms, which isn't doable IMHO - at least not for this kind of game.
It's doable. Bethesda did it with Morrowind, which was the last, and probably only game ever really built for the PC first - then ported to the XBox. Every game since then has been built for consoles 1st, with the PC as an afterthought.

And another thing - This game is bringing $2000 computers to their knees. How in the hell can it run on a console? You'd have to chain together 10 XBoxes to have the computing power of some of these computers that are having difficulties running this game.
Posted June 02, 2011
avatar
cbarbagallo: So, I assume that a Darnifed UI is coming for TW2, then? Hmm?
Heh, I thought about it, but I don't think so. It's cumbersome, but I'm not as appalled as I was with the others. :)

avatar
DarN: Game design is an art. Their art suffered due to an UI intended for both platforms, which isn't doable IMHO - at least not for this kind of game.
avatar
TheBigChief: It's doable. Bethesda did it with Morrowind, which was the last, and probably only game ever really built for the PC first - then ported to the XBox. Every game since then has been built for consoles 1st, with the PC as an afterthought.

And another thing - This game is bringing $2000 computers to their knees. How in the hell can it run on a console? You'd have to chain together 10 XBoxes to have the computing power of some of these computers that are having difficulties running this game.
It'll probably run fine on consoles with reduced settings.

With Morrowind, the consoles likely suffered instead of the PC. Just take a look at Oblivion's UI to see what they learned from that experience...
Posted June 02, 2011
I'm very, very sorry to say, but CDProjekt Red is full of shit. You know I was practically a fanboy... I really was.

Consider the following, if you can:
1. Months before release CPR were still saying a console release was "likely" but uncertain. They kept saying "PC is our priority right now."
2. Less than a month after PC release, a console version is announced. That sure is a quick turnaround from "likely" to "we have a playable version!"
3. The UI and interface are abysmal in the PC version.
4. CPR confirmed themselves that the interface "was designed with a gamepad in mind from the very beginning"

It is my belief that CPR always intended to release a console version, which is not only very apparent in the design changes they made, but with this expedited console release announcement, it is all but confirmed.

It is also my belief CPR lied to their fanbase, making us think PC really was their priority, not to upset PC pre-orders and sales at launch, playing on our goodwill from their past achievement. CPR must have known with 100% certainty for A LONG TIME ago that a console version would come out. The QTE, the 16:9 aspect ratio, the awful interface... it screamed console. People called on it, irrational fanboys dismissed it based on no arguments of merit other than blind faith, and here we are.

Considering official TW2 forums are still not up and operations three weeks after the game release, the slowness of patch release, the questionable design changes, the shitty quality of the collector edition's content (few exceptions aside, but we can all agree it is a disappointment), I find CPR's behavior appalling.

This doesn't make TW2 any less of a 'good' game, but it certainly is sub-par compared to TW1 EE. My expectations were probably too high, too. I think most of us around here are educated adults, and if you are capable of being rational, I did not find this announcement surprising at all. Anyone surprised at a console announcement must be very, very naïve.

I'm not going to say stupid shit like "Not buying another CPR game ever again" as this is not only irrational, but it is stupid. But finished are the days of me singing praises for them across the Internet, thinking they were some kind of saints. They're just as greedy as any other bigger studios now.

As it's been said, they could have developed two completely separate versions with a "true" PC interface as they did in the first game, and used the current interface for the xbox 360 version. They chose money instead.
Posted June 02, 2011
Well they sold there souls even after receiving such a positive wave of support from the PC exclusive community.

Witcher 3 is officially now crippled and wont be purchased by me.. Alot of the community only bought this game to support the PC exclusive/DRM free movement..way to kill your fanbase so early in the game.

Sadly now witcher 2 will be passed off for the PC users so the console game is more supported.. If i could get my money back i would and just pirate the game..

Another developer ruined by the casual gamer.
Posted June 02, 2011
avatar
TigerLord: Considering official TW2 forums are still not up and operations three weeks after the game release, the slowness of patch release, the questionable design changes, the shitty quality of the collector edition's content (few exceptions aside, but we can all agree it is a disappointment), I find CPR's behavior appalling.
Whaaaat? SLOW patch releases? Are you out of your mind? It's been 2.5 weeks since release and they're about to release 1.2, which addresses most present issues. 1.1 which fixed the most pressing issues concerning installation and startup is already a week old. How fast would you like your patches?
It's not that they're having like 5 lines of code with buggy parts flashing red....
Name an example of better/faster customer support.


And I am overall satisfied with the quality of the CE contents. The only weak-spot is the plastic inlay that broke too easily (and the world map which is too small, imo) - and guess what? The sculptures will be replaced for free, with some kind of added goody as apology.
The coins, cards, pamphlet, soundtrack and especially the artbook and dice are top-notch. There have been waaaaaaaay worse CEs, and in fact it's among the best I've ever had - both absolute and value for money-wise.

You're right to some degree - the game has certainly been developed with easy console portability in mind. Partially to PC-gamers' inconvenience. It's a shame and I, too, hope that there will be some kind of revamped interface (and mod tools!!). But that's no reason to be unfair and make everything bad CDPR does.
Posted June 02, 2011
Consoles kill games..everyone with half a brain knows this..u have to forgive us for thinking this..

how many times wronged does it take you to learn ??
Posted June 02, 2011
avatar
DarN: Game design is an art. Their art suffered due to an UI intended for both platforms, which isn't doable IMHO - at least not for this kind of game.
avatar
TheBigChief: It's doable. Bethesda did it with Morrowind, which was the last, and probably only game ever really built for the PC first - then ported to the XBox. Every game since then has been built for consoles 1st, with the PC as an afterthought.

And another thing - This game is bringing $2000 computers to their knees. How in the hell can it run on a console? You'd have to chain together 10 XBoxes to have the computing power of some of these computers that are having difficulties running this game.
So much ignorance, my 800 dollar 2 year old PC mazes this game out fine. This 2000 PC is ttoal BS spread by the uneducated.
Posted June 02, 2011
Alright, I'll retract "slow" patching.

However, in my opinion, all of these things should have been caught during playtesting. Perhaps the polish fanboys were too busy creaming themselves to write thorough reports after their playtests? Or CPR ignored these reports? I cannot fathom most of these bugs would not have been found in house.

The rest of my list still applies. Worse CE contenders doesn't make that one better. Considering the asking price, that awful Geralt bust is an insult, but that's just my opinion.

What pisses me off the most is that CPR KNOWS how to make proper PC interfaces. They nailed it in TW1 EE. It was a PC, RPG old style interface. It had its imperfections, but no one could claim it wasn't optimized for mouse (dragging stuff around, etc). CPR knew better. They preferred to develop the PC version so that porting it to console would cost them a fraction of the price.

Was it worth it for them? Financially, I'm sure it will have been. But I'm sure many will remember it when TW3 comes out, and I won't be pre-ordering it this time. I'll wait and see what it looks like at release.

I haven't been so disappointed since the day I lost my virginity.
Post edited June 02, 2011 by TigerLord
Posted June 02, 2011
avatar
DarN: Game design is an art. Their art suffered due to an UI intended for both platforms, which isn't doable IMHO - at least not for this kind of game.
avatar
TheBigChief: It's doable. Bethesda did it with Morrowind, which was the last, and probably only game ever really built for the PC first - then ported to the XBox. Every game since then has been built for consoles 1st, with the PC as an afterthought.
It's trickier for an action game, because interface design necessarily affects balance since some actions may change significantly in feasibility or efficiency. For instance, console controllers are usually not as good at precise aiming... unless you have some spiffy light-gun setup, in which case the PC users might well be at a disadvantage. Console controllers are more likely to be able to handle complex simultaneous button pushing than, say, ordinary PC keyboard drivers, and to have multiple analogue directional controllers -- while some PC gamers do use joysticks, throttles and the like, they're more common for simmers than computer RPGers.

Granted, for a single-player game balance matters less than games where the emphasis is on multiplayer. Still, one needs to consider this for quest design so that parts don't seem terribly unfair or ugly. If we take e.g. Interplay's take on "Neuromancer" -- /not/ an action game -- you'd have to have an on-screen keyboard for most console users to be able to properly take advantage of the dialogue system where there were "Ask about ----" options and you basically filled-in-the-blank, for instance (and where there might be *many* ---- that result in interesting answers).

avatar
TheBigChief: And another thing - This game is bringing $2000 computers to their knees. How in the hell can it run on a console? You'd have to chain together 10 XBoxes to have the computing power of some of these computers that are having difficulties running this game.
With a much more fixed platform, you can do a LOT more optimization if you need to than compared to the wackily heterogeneous PC-gaming world.
Posted June 02, 2011
avatar
TheBigChief: It's doable. Bethesda did it with Morrowind, which was the last, and probably only game ever really built for the PC first - then ported to the XBox. Every game since then has been built for consoles 1st, with the PC as an afterthought.
avatar
lw2jgog: It's trickier for an action game, because interface design necessarily affects balance since some actions may change significantly in feasibility or efficiency. For instance, console controllers are usually not as good at precise aiming... unless you have some spiffy light-gun setup, in which case the PC users might well be at a disadvantage. Console controllers are more likely to be able to handle complex simultaneous button pushing than, say, ordinary PC keyboard drivers, and to have multiple analogue directional controllers -- while some PC gamers do use joysticks, throttles and the like, they're more common for simmers than computer RPGers.

Granted, for a single-player game balance matters less than games where the emphasis is on multiplayer. Still, one needs to consider this for quest design so that parts don't seem terribly unfair or ugly. If we take e.g. Interplay's take on "Neuromancer" -- /not/ an action game -- you'd have to have an on-screen keyboard for most console users to be able to properly take advantage of the dialogue system where there were "Ask about ----" options and you basically filled-in-the-blank, for instance (and where there might be *many* ---- that result in interesting answers).

avatar
TheBigChief: And another thing - This game is bringing $2000 computers to their knees. How in the hell can it run on a console? You'd have to chain together 10 XBoxes to have the computing power of some of these computers that are having difficulties running this game.
avatar
lw2jgog: With a much more fixed platform, you can do a LOT more optimization if you need to than compared to the wackily heterogeneous PC-gaming world.
True, but you can only optimize 512 MB ram, and 6 year old tech so much LMAO, they are not m,agicians. Consoles cannot touch even a mid range PC these days.
Posted June 02, 2011
It wouldve been easier for them to just announce that there officially greedy..

Same Effect.
Posted June 02, 2011
avatar
thekingcasper: It wouldve been easier for them to just announce that there officially greedy..

Same Effect.
Please stop.
Posted June 02, 2011
avatar
Goodmongo: As I wrote I don't care if it appears on an XBox. I do care if the design makes my enjoyment of it less on a PC which is my choice in gaming. I suppose you like those QTE's during the boss fights then? I don't and if they continue down the path of designing for a console instead of the PC then I may exercise my right and not buy the third in the series.
avatar
AfroDave: Talk about a reaction to something which does not effect you.

Makes you wonder why developers make console games with the whining they recieve for a game which is not out, based on assumptions that they are all of a sudden abandoning PC, it is possible for a developer to go multiplatform without leaving the PC out, look at Valve.
But it does affect him. It affects every PC game that is released with a console interface.
Yet again, it is simple:
Play W1. Play W2. Compare UIs.
And yet again, unless a niche game (like a flight sim or something like NFS) there is no such thing as a "game made for PC" that does not support a hardware mouse. Period.



On another note and speaking of GOG's announcement: I am thrilled that EA is finally opening the vault and letting GOG release all of the classic games they pirat.. er.. bought the rights to, but decided to just archive. Unfortunately they are not releasing System Shock and Syndicate right away, but Privateer? That was a heck of a game. I still have the original disks for all of those games. I will love to have new versions working natively on XP.
Post edited June 02, 2011 by SystemShock7
Posted June 02, 2011
I so called it, so much for all the its fanboys who believed it was solely PC only. Its so obvious it was made to be easily ported to consoles then just straight up PC designed.

This however wont sell much if they dont offer a alternate console balancing like every other RPG does for console releases. If you think certain PC users dont like how hard the beginning of the game is, there will be a Sea of complaining if its not changed for consoles.
Post edited June 02, 2011 by LordRikerQ
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
This is my favourite topic
Community
The Witcher 2BIG ANNOUCEMENT TODAY FROM CDR(131 posts)(131 posts)
(131 posts)