Jim Sterling is notorious for getting gamers riled up with his reviews. I am an irrational fanboy of this game (10/10 for me), but I 100% stand by Jim's right to give any game any score he wants.

Indeed nothing new he likes to give low scores to great games and 10/10 to lame games just for the fun of it , he is indeed the king of trolling :)

There is a game i don't remember the name that got 4/10 average on all gaming sites , well he gave the game 10/10 because the game was so bad it was good ... i feel sorry for him , he needs attention...

Ignore the twit. Attention seeking, trolling, wanting more hits for his site, etc. - whatever the reason, you can be sure he didn't seek to write a fair and balanced review for this game.

Though I disagree with his final rating, a lot of the points he makes are accurate. It's not exactly a perfectly designed game.

What I don't understand is why he seemingly ignored its strengths.

Fair reviewer, although he probably doesn't enjoy the Witcher universe hence the rather weak rating. Fighting is much like the first game, IMO, flawed but improved.

And this is a flat lie:

"That said, there is some notable texture pop-in and laughable character animation, and clothing constantly collides with human bodies, even on NPCs who have armor that should have been designed specifically for them. It's unsettling to try and talk to a character whose shoulder pads are jammed into their face."

If you call it flawed, name me an RPG with better combat that involves swords please.

All professional reviews are opinions, and theres always somebody somewhere that hates any game, professional or otherwise.

And if some people are correct that he is some sort of professional troll, then just like with any troll, the worst thing you can do is to jump up and down, get angry, and give him attention. If we are doing that, then he has achieved his goal, and no doubt takes no small amusement from the reaction. Frankly, I wouldnt have even made the thread, giving him more attention and more hits, if that were the case.

I noticed slight clipping of a beard and other hair but that's about it. I think he just sat in front of the game with a note pad, eager to find anything to bitch about. Actually, I did that about DA2 (so I could write a review as well) but I had a right to - I loved the original unlike this twit who just hates proper RPGs it seems.

I thought The Witcher 1's combat was better in some ways, what with the ability to change stances (I would have loved a stance that hits multiple enemies early on in the second game) and having to properly time your attacks.

The 3rd act really doesnt deserve more than 6

Yeah, I haven't noticed anything like this at all...animations seem fine also.

Yeah... I played with a controller, and targeting was a pain in the ass. It's also a bit strange that Geralt is incapable of walking backwards but doesn't mind rolling out of trouble.

A game like this, is what you make of it. I had an argument with someone on another forum because he basically said "the combat sucks, you have to run away to recover health all the time". I said: if you play the game in such a way that you constantly lose health, then you need to improve or work on it because this is not the way you're supposed to play it.

It's similar to you with your traps: that's not the best way to use them so don't blame the game for that. Traps are for covering exits (when you suspect enemies might appear) and this happens a lot in the game. I managed to take out a whole gang of elves because I suspected an ambush. Put snares everywhere and they never even got to me - died within seconds. For what you want to do, bombs are much more suitable.

And nearly every RPG has an aggression perimeter so that's a bit of a weak point as well. It's just the way these games work - otherwise you could just lure them towards guards. The RPGs that I can think of that let you lure enemies far ahead, were always exploited this way (Ultima Online for example) and that's hardly fun.

The rolling is vital, though. Without it, combat would become like Oblivion: a game of parry, hit, parry, hit. Dull and repetitive. Rolling means you can flank, attack their backs, quickly evade, etc. How you can call it silly when it adds an important element to the combat ... it really wouldn't work without it. The Demonoid review makes a mistake there as well, calling Geralt slow when the rolling is what makes him fast and is essential to be used.