Because normal mode should be that, a mode that conforms to the play style of 90% of players experienced in RPG's, not the 10% who's skill exceeds that of the common player. Think about your argument for a second.

Switching to easy is a band aid fix to the problem that was never the common gamer's fault in the first place. Face the facts: they didn't playtest the game to a mass audience. Balance and control issues persist.

This is why the Call of Duty and it's ilk continue to sell in the billions, because anybody with enough practice can pick it up and learn it. It's been playtested and balanced TO DEATH

I don't know where you guys pull those numbers from. Just because you don't get the hang of the new combat system doesn't mean it's the majority / 90%.
Maybe you belong to those 10% who have to rely on easy modes.
Also can't remember a statement from CDPR, that this game would be for everyone/mass audience.

you DO realize that when something is fine, people don't talk about it. if you have a problem with something then you go and voice your opinion.

thus how do you know 90% of witcher 2 plaeyrs are having a blast and playing it great, and its you 10% who are having a difficult time? Only reason i'm posting at all on here is because it breaks up my work to talk.

otherwise i would not post ever cause my game works great and the difficutly i think is totally fine at normal. any easier and it would be pointless. what is the point of a difficutly if you NEVER die.

do you want normal so that you NEVER die? to me that sounds like easy. a normal game you should die at times. In hard difficulty you should die a lot, and in insane, well ou get the picture. To reduce deaths in all difficulties, its just like in ev erything in life, it takes practice and getting good at the game.

What is teh point of a game is a 9 year old kid can pick up a controller andbeat any part of the game without dying? to me that sounds like god mode.

you can't compare cod with this. cod is popular for its multiplayer. thus shitty players are playing against shitty players. you can easily tell when an amazing cod player comes into a game, and when tehy do, you get half the people bitching about how he must be cheating

Taken from PCGamer's review:
http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/05/19/the-witcher-2-review/

"The new combat system is a more mixed bag. As before, the gimmick is that you use a steel sword against humans, a silver one against monsters, along with several simple magic spells to stun, burn and otherwise tip the balance in your favour. Between fights, you mix magic potions to adjust your stats in various directions, and lay down traps. Instead of pointing and selecting like before though, every attack is a direct interaction with the game: mouse-clicks for fast and slow strikes, and hotkeys to hurl magic and bombs, parry attacks and roll. This works well against one or two opponents at once, but a mix of long, non-interruptible animations and bad targeting can make fighting groups a pain.

Oddly, this is especially problematic early on, when Geralt has almost no stamina, his spells are weak, you can’t block more than a couple of hits at a time, rear attacks deal 200% damage, and you can easily be obliterated by random encounters. Many early skills aren’t about making Geralt a better fighter but stopping him being a crap one. This means that combat can be much harder at the start of the first chapter than anywhere else in the game, with little sense of escalation outside of specific boss fights."

PC Gamer is pretty respected. You are confusing weakening the challenges with balancing. There's a difference

Oh, you mean the "The best RPG combat ever. (Quote from DA 2 review)"-PC Gamer? Well, I guess there are different oppinions about their credibility around.

I'm not a very skilled player with hyper reflexes (actually, I suck in any game requires speed, reflexes, precision)... I simply adapt... and the cs of this game doesn't require reflexes, speed, and so... not at all, less than a Batman Arkham Asylum, for example (another great combat system).

The first time I play I thought that TW2 was a very hard game (on Hard), when I understood the combat system, it turn out to be simply a challenge game, like every game should be. And it's a perfect cs for an Action RPG, because as you level up you become more powerful and things get easier... and it's not challenging because you should be better, but because your choices about the fights should be better...

Oh, they crapped it big time with this. And their credibility went down a few good notches. It even doesn't matter if they gave it to the wrong reviewer, and yes, there is such a thing as a wrong reviewer... I myself know this perfectly being a former magazine reviewer.

Another is when the editor looks at the most important games for the upcoming issue and spots irregularities or forcing of some particular issue/problem. In light of this their editor either didn't look at it by believing his writer has done it by himself, or he truly believes Dragon Age 2 is the epitome of story/depth/art in RPG's this or any other year.

My guess is that when DA2 came out they didn't have anything more bombastic to print so they spun it as high as possible to get sales/views and now the balancing rears it's ugly head... So they did the W2 review with words of praise, but the rating fails miserably, which makes them lose and foolish, even dough they try their best. It is like trying for nothing :)

Do some of you people read? What alot of people are saying isnt they want a walk in the park we do want a challenge, BUT a REASONABLE challenge. That is why switching to Easy doesnt fix the underlining problem. Easy is as it says easy, but thats not what people are asking for.

Normal mode as it is now conforms to the hardcore players who would simply play on Hard or Insane modes to begin with, and does not work for the majority of people who would be considered normal experienced RPG players. Its not a reasonable challenge, its just plain cheap, thats the problem. Dont think all the complaining is for a cake walk game, just for a more balanced challenge. The way it is now, Normal mode makes Hard in most other RPGs look like a total joke, and thats not fun. T

hough if Hard is so easy for hardcore types, I think they should increase the difficulty there.

Normal is a reasonable challenge, you just have to learn how to play. If you want to whacky whacky with no tactical effort then play on easy. If you use tactics the game should become relatively easy not far into chapter one.

This thread saddens me because I bet CDP lower the normal difficulty in a patch, which is just giving in to people who want simplistic combat but refuse to put the game on easy. That leaves people like me, who enjoy normal mode now, with the option of either playing it on the new easier normal mode or jumping up to hard, which probably is genuinely frustrating.

The smart thing to do would be to balance the difficulty only(!) in the prologue as it is a kind of a tutorial, and leave the rest alone preety much.

I thought the difficulty was fine. Only times I died where to the dragon (once for both sequences), when doorways changed cameras in such a way that SENT ME BACK THROUGH THE DOORWAY ENDLESSLY @#%@#%, and when I screwed up really really bad.

Quen is immensely helpful. The trap sign is immensely helpful when fighting just one or two guys. Axii is useless, at least not upgraded. Aard is great against shielded guys. I don't really bother with Igni. Haven't used any bombs, other traps, and haven't needed potions yet.

Combat gets better.

During the prologue I was conjugating profanities in all kinds of new ways because I was completely frustrated with the combat, but once you get used to the timing and the fact that it's still possible to get hit during a roll, everything goes a bit smoother.

Just give it a bit of time, roll a little earlier than you think necessary, and use Quen whenever there's a chance of running into something murderous. If you still hate the combat by the time you're knee-deep in the first act, then I'd be honestly surprised.

My personal theory is that EA kidnapped their loved ones and exchanged them for an absurdly favorable review, but to each their own.

I was being serious, but OK :)

Why is it that developers feel the need to change things so radically between versions? To what do they ascribe their initial success if they are willing to throw it all away? Can't take potions except in meditation? "A Witcher without potions is only half a Witcher" -- Geralt