You know there's more than one thing that's good, right? It's not like every game that isn't an Oblivion clone is somehow a step backward.

Except it's not. Maybe you read it wrong.

I read that as, "My opinion is invalid, lalalala!"

What? That marketing blurb is completely correct.

Engrossing: Check. Unless almost every reviewer, gamer and friend who's opinion I have read is wrong.

Mature: Check. Murder, Love, Betrayal, Violence, Death, Politics, Sex and many more generally considered "mature" topics are touched upon - in a non-cartoonish, well thought out manner.

Thought-provoking: Check. Just look at some of the threads here. The game e.g. has me guessing "which is the ending that leaves the North as strong as possible?", also many decisions in the game had me pondering quite a while. Go save a dragon, or my girl? Give the princess to the impulsive, rather dumb but powerful king or to the considerate, humble constabler without authority? Etc.

Non-linear narration: Check. Just consider that act 2 happens in different locations. Or consider that depending on your actions, there are at least five people in the last city that might not be alive. Etc.

Defining new standards: In my opinion, yes - and I have played almost every RPG/Dungeon Crawler I could get my hands on since Amberstar back in....1994?



Btw., just because there was a trend to "open world" recently does not necessarily mean that this is better than a story-driven game like TW2.

I beginning to doubt whether you have even played Witcher 2!

As...you don't need to kill all monsters, you don't need to upgrade weapons and you don't even need to save the damsel explicitly.....to complete the game.

Citing the above how can it be the same game, when you clearly have a choice to avoid the above!!.

Not only can you not choose to save the damsel, you can also change the outcome of the plot lines themselves..you get to define your own story and the game upto an extent greatly gives you option to do so..compared to 98% of the games ever developed.

In Zelda, can you change anything..what ever one does..how ever one plays..no matter what..the programmers have given only ONE train track (story) in Zelda..its the Track to get eight fragments of the Triforce of Wisdom, which are located in eight dungeons protected by eight guardian monsters.

After getting all the above, you/link is forced to enter death mountain..no matter what you want to do...you/link is forced kill Ganon with a silver arrow (no other way)..no matter what you do...you/link is forced to save Zelda..forced to restore peace to Hyrule.

How many ever times one plays Zelda, the story in the game cannot be changed..at all..there is only one story..which cannot be changed.

Witcher 2, x ways to play..still how can you say that Zelda and Witcher 2 (taking apart the graphics) are still one and the same game minus the graphics / sound..

Witcher 2, I can decide how the story ends in more than 2 ways..Zelda I cannot, it ends only in 2 ways..either one dies with a game over or one wins by saying Hyrule.

Wow. Thanks for the Zelda spoiler!!!

you may as well save £28 and buy one of those role play books where you are given options and turn the page corresponding to you choice then?!?

Second doubt, have you even brought Witcher 2!.

We are dicussing about your...comments from first post about the game, not about going MONK. haha..

Mate, I bought TW2 worked out how to play-it, loved it and then it ended abruptly. The game is too short and the way it makes you play is too linear, it puts the evolution of computer games back 20 years!

How can you have a game in 2011 where you can complete it in 10hrs? Everything else about the game is perfect it's just WAY too short and if they actually put some time/effort into making it playable for more that 10hrs then it could rival some of the best RPGs avaliable but it doesn't it gives you a third of a game for the price of a full game.

If I wasn't running back and forth all the time due to a lack of fast travel (which I know the Devs make you do to increase the longevity as the actual game is so short!!!) it would have been finished even earlier I missed this earlier... LOL ;)

You're either a master of dickish hyperbole, some kind of Witcher 2 savant, or seriously not playing the game right.

Seriously. You must have missed literally everything.

I know I'm being rude, but you're being ridiculous. It's a nice balance.

Hahahahahahhahahahhahaha.
Sorry. I couldn't resist.

I think that different gamers have different requirements.

I was happy to play Witcher 2 in a sensible amount of time...then play the alternative path...then retire my Geralt until (if) some compelling additional material comes out.

I believe that others (maybe like OP) are looking for a game they can sink a stack of time into and stay in for a much longer period.

I am happy with the Witcher 2's tight focus on the main plot and corresponding lack of fat. This will seem limiting to someone who wants to turn over every stone in the Aedernian Wasteland (in search of Power Armour and the Alien Blaster?) and power-up their Witcher before they start the main quest.

This game just isn't like that. I don't see it as a backwards thing necessarily...its just a different type of game.

And the most sensible comment of the day goes to.............Gregster!

Thank you ;)

My experience with Witcher 2...

*Spoilers, do not read..recommended you do not read*
I spent two whole weeks on the game, repeatedly playing the game for around 4 Full times from the start; importing my witcher 1 game till the end..and on top of that I saved the game in Act 3 during multiple times and completed the game with variations of 6 times for every 3(out of 4) full time I replayed the game.

One of the playthroughs (where I did a speed run), i can guarantee with savefile's date creation time that I took lot more than 10 hours you mentioned you completed the game in my fastest run in the one of the start-> to ->finish playthroughs.

If I put in the time I spend pressing the 'WASD" keys out of the equation for movement in the map/level design's more than once (citing that the devs put up terrain, flora, landscape to look atleast once)..I will still put the time as more than 10 hours to complete the game with quests/content in the game from start to finish with all the quest I completed on my single play-through.

And..If one personally chose not to experience the full game and sprint to the end skipping the game quests/content, how can it be the games fault...haha...Especially when one has personally chosen not to play it.

Its like getting a cup of nice cup of tea for ten quid at a tea room, and drink it up like hot water in a flash; instead of enjoying the Presentation, flavor, location, ambiance and the people. Then complaining (never seen anyone complain) that the tea was..wrong or something extraordinary or even may be mind blowing..!

Fair enough. I wasn't seeking to characterise 100% of players...just trying to see if I understood what was underlying some of the OP's concerns. Given his response I think I got at least some of it right.

But at the end of the day a cup of tea is a cup of tea? Whether you pay £10 in a tea room or 50p in a greasy spoon once is all said and done it is still made with tea leaves, water and milk and it's a cup of tea. That is the perfect analogy for this game, thanks. A game is played for enjoyment, I want to enjoy playing the game and my idea of enjoyment isn't looking at the beautiful vistas, flora, and terrain. I want to play a game...

Studies show that people like computer games due to the majority of games giving 'rewards' for completing certain tasks and completing tasks in TW2 just doesn't give the right amount of rewards.

I got to the city in act 3 and thought...right my character is now levelled up OK the first two acts got me used to the combat system, now the game is going to start properly and then BAM, choose to save Triss, fight the dragon.. Game ends!!

Germanicanus.........You put that very beautifully!