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 2Game is too Short(60 posts)(60 posts)
(60 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
This is my favourite topic
Posted May 20, 2011
I really haven't completed The Witcher 2 yet, but I am at the end of Chapter 2 now and have been playing for 26 hours. I did half of the side-quests and died more than 400 times. I got lost and spent up to an hour of trying to figure out where to go (retarded dwarf could only write retarded poems XD). I do believe I have covered most of the game so I also agree that just the games storyline is definitely not 40 hours long as it was claimed to be. No worrys though, I think the game is still very good and interesting. I am looking forward already to my second playthrough and counting on modding support and DLCs!
Big profits to you, CD Project, and best of luck!
Posted May 20, 2011
The biggest problem is the extremely lacluster ending, no matter how you look at it it does seem very rushed, like they spend so much time on the perfect act 1 and 2 and then saw they were running out of time. honestly when you get to act 3 you get the feeling that your maybe midgame based on the story after the

/spoiler council sumit and the dragon, i was sure i was about to chase after sile, and letho, however then the epiloge title jumps up and letho is just conveniently standing there waiting for you. then he just starts bableing about some of the questions you might have and the game stops. /spoiler end

act 3 is just poorly done, and the game would have been much better had it been 1 or 2 acts longer, so we could have gotten a better ending. like someone said earlyer its like fallout 3 had ended after you found your dad.
Posted May 20, 2011
avatar
untamed: I didn't rush, I did every sidequest i found apart from 1
How can you be sure you did not miss a lot of them? I'm playing 3 days in a row, 8-12 hours a day, and I'm yet to finish the 2nd chapter. After the 1st one, I've checked the guide index and realized that I've completely missed a quest! (I think it's called "Party") And like someone said, after two days in Flotsam, I was sure there were nothing unseen, but up to final moments I always found something new...

So yes, my 25 hours are more likely to be 20 hours if we remove all those save/load sequences, walking around and stuff. I'm sure I'll need at least 5-8 hours more to finish the game (at least), and I've finished KOTOR or Mass Effect in less than 30 hours, without skipping the dialogs and with doing everything i found.... and this game has greater replay value than both of them!
Posted May 20, 2011
avatar
Zedblade: Is there something in game to track your hours played? I normally use xfire to do that, but it's not supported yet.

I had 52 hours played in the first Witcher, with that only being a play through and a half. Hearing that this is only 20 hours is pretty disappointing.
avatar
mastorofpuppetz: posts like this make me scratch my head. One guy says its 20 hours so you think it is? Its 20 hours if you rush. A game like this easily will take most RPG players 40 + hours, lots to explore, lots of crafting, sidquests.
I've heard more people say that its takes around 20 hours to beat, even when doing a good amount of side quests. The developers themselves have said it would be a 40 hour game on average doing just the main story, It's starting to look like that may have been vastly exaggerated.

Either way i'm going to take my time and enjoy whats here.
Posted May 20, 2011
avatar
untamed: I agree, took me 20 hours for my TW2 playthrough, and I think at least 60+ hours with TW1.

But from the looks of the ending and the shortness of it I think they must be bringing out a large DLC/expansion which has another chapter ... at least I hope so.
avatar
Extace: Well thats what happens when you only run threw the main quest story and skipp almost all side quests. TW1 i also got done in 18hours on easy with just skipping all unnecesary quests. + TW2 has great replay value with its 16diffrent endings.
Well, I don't care how many endings it has. I can never bring myself to replay a game such as the Witcher series where little changes between play throughs... It's not like it's an open ended open world game with plenty of exploration and out of the way locations...

i.e. something like morrowind and Mount & Blade, I get a ton of play out of exploring every possible inch while games like TW & Drakensang once I finish, I'm done for years until I've forgotten enough of it for it to almost be like playing a new game again and even then some games just aren't good enough to warrant a replay, e.g. I never bothered to replay the SSI gold box AD&D games once finished.

All of that said I still get WAY more play time out of 4X games, e.g. Civ series, Space Empires, etc. and other strategy games and even space sims than even most open ended RPGs... but still only 25-30h for a $50 ARPG, thats REALLY short and I wouldn't complain if it were $30, but even then it'd be compared to 80+h Drakensang...
Posted May 20, 2011
avatar
Extace: Well thats what happens when you only run threw the main quest story and skipp almost all side quests. TW1 i also got done in 18hours on easy with just skipping all unnecesary quests. + TW2 has great replay value with its 16diffrent endings.
avatar
cutterjohn: Well, I don't care how many endings it has. I can never bring myself to replay a game such as the Witcher series where little changes between play throughs... It's not like it's an open ended open world game with plenty of exploration and out of the way locations...

i.e. something like morrowind and Mount & Blade, I get a ton of play out of exploring every possible inch while games like TW & Drakensang once I finish, I'm done for years until I've forgotten enough of it for it to almost be like playing a new game again and even then some games just aren't good enough to warrant a replay, e.g. I never bothered to replay the SSI gold box AD&D games once finished.

All of that said I still get WAY more play time out of 4X games, e.g. Civ series, Space Empires, etc. and other strategy games and even space sims than even most open ended RPGs... but still only 25-30h for a $50 ARPG, thats REALLY short and I wouldn't complain if it were $30, but even then it'd be compared to 80+h Drakensang...
Well then you should have read into before buying the game, seriously some people are just talking so much rubbish. Also the game does not change a ''little'' its a whole fucking diffrent story but the fact that you cant put yourself to it doesent make the game not worth its money! it makes you a lazy gamer.
Posted May 20, 2011
It's not short. It all depends on your play style. I just got to Chapter 2 and I've already put in 20+ hours. It's not the game's fault, it's your fault if you rushed and think it's too short.

Long playtime doesn't make a game good and I wish people would get that out of their heads. Not every game needs to be open world, 100+ hours and loaded with a ton of filler crap.
Posted May 20, 2011
There's 16 endings I've been told. 16x20=320h gameplay. As I can't currently give it more than 1h daily seems I won't have to buy another game for nearly a year! :D
Posted May 20, 2011
avatar
ThulsaDooom: It's not short. It all depends on your play style. I just got to Chapter 2 and I've already put in 20+ hours. It's not the game's fault, it's your fault if you rushed and think it's too short.

Long playtime doesn't make a game good and I wish people would get that out of their heads. Not every game needs to be open world, 100+ hours and loaded with a ton of filler crap.
Ah the strawman fanboy argument defending a game's shortness, but I hate to break it to you but most decent lengthy games are NOT full of "crap" "filler"...

I've yet to run into a lengthy RPG that I didn't enjoy while most of the short ones turn out to be cheap crap, although TW2 is not one of them yet it is disappointingly short v. TW1 which was also good BTW despite being MUCH longer...
Post edited May 20, 2011 by cutterjohn
Posted May 20, 2011
well i for one am pretty mad about the fact that the devs lied to us and said the main storyline alone would take at least 40 hours and that time can be doubled or tripled if you do everything in the game, thats a pretty huge difference in time, people finishing in 25 hours or so after doing everything when they promised it would take 80-120 hours to do that, they should have told the trutth.
Posted May 20, 2011
avatar
cutterjohn: Ah the strawman fanboy argument defending a game's shortness, but I hate to break it to you but most decent lengthy games are NOT full of "crap" "filler"...

I've yet to run into a lengthy RPG that I didn't enjoy while most of the short ones turn out to be cheap crap, although TW2 is not one of them yet it is disappointingly short v. TW1 which was also good BTW despite being MUCH longer...
Yes, defending a game against petulant crybabies makes me a fanboy....
Posted May 20, 2011
its really the poor ending. there is no real conclusion except that you are able to kill some people your were chasing.
you never manage to actually proof to anyone that you are not the kingslayer.
a lot of decisions dont seem to have any consequences within the game.
tons of talking about the wild hunt. but nothing happens except geralt remembering.
everything hints at some more epic plot which the game does not deliver. maybe its in the free dlc or expansion. but in this shape, the game does certainly feel short.

there may be 16 different endings. but thats probably just for accounting who you killed or let die.
Posted May 20, 2011
avatar
Bodyless: its really the poor ending. there is no real conclusion except that you are able to kill some people your were chasing.
you never manage to actually proof to anyone that you are not the kingslayer.
a lot of decisions dont seem to have any consequences within the game.
tons of talking about the wild hunt. but nothing happens except geralt remembering.
everything hints at some more epic plot which the game does not deliver. maybe its in the free dlc or expansion. but in this shape, the game does certainly feel short.

there may be 16 different endings. but thats probably just for accounting who you killed or let die.
So true about Wild Hunt. It's just a couple cutscenes after the dialogues. If Geralt can remember his past with the help of the conversations like that, he can easily deceived i say. Anyone who knows Geralt's past well -friend or foe- can easily turn the tide to his/her desired direction.. Very terrible way to make his memory back. Minus point to the story developers.

About the whole game, I just beat the game and it took me 27 hrs. I did all the side quests except that tattoo quest, moved around most of the time, hunted as many monsters as i can and finished at the end of 34th level bar, almost 35. I was expecting some Wild Hunt riders and some surprises in the end but turns out to be a very easy fight against Letho. Veeeery disappointing end indeed but i really enjoyed the game. Especially in Floatsam :)
Post edited May 20, 2011 by glosoli
Posted May 26, 2011
This game is tooooooooooooo short. Only have 3 chapter. I've beaten the game in 24 hr (more or less) and at lv 33. And almost all the time you spend in this game is for side quest. They should look at Dragon Age. I need 50 hr to complete the game (W/o DLC).
Post edited May 26, 2011 by doremonhg9x
Posted May 26, 2011
The 3rd chapter/epilogue have nothing on TW1's ending which tied everything together and was pretty epic. I didn't feel as connected to the characters as I did in the first game, nor did the enemies really piss me off like the professor/javed did.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
This is my favourite topic
Community
The Witcher 2Game is too Short(60 posts)(60 posts)
(60 posts)