well, act 2 is WAY WAY TOO DIFFERENT IF DEFENDING ON WHAT YOU CHOSE IN ACT 1.

If you spent 20 hrs, then go back and replay for another 15 hrs so see the different!

Yes game is too short! :(
TW 1 is double longer.
Act 1 is long, complex and best. Act 2 little shorter but good enough. Act 3 in my opinion is not finished. Just couple missions, with ending.

TW 2 is a great game, only minus is shortness...

just 3 acts? Oh :(

True length of the game is much more since you have to play chapters 2 and 3 again to actually see most of the content. Single playthrough is not enough.

I think it will take somewhere around 30-60 hours to see everything which is pretty long, just not extremely so. There are precious few games made that are longer in these days, however.

The game did feel "too short" in a sense but I actually consider that a good thing. The Witcher 2 left me wanting more (I can't wait for the expansion!) and there wasn't a single part where I felt like it dragged on. Even the side-quests were interesting. That's pretty rare in RPGs. As much as I love the Dragon Age series, I found myself just getting bored several times in both origins and DA2 because of too many redundant battles / side quests. It was the same with WItcher 1; it was a great game but the sidequests all felt the same (Kill X number of Monster Y)... in TW2 everything was interesting. Sure they left some loose ends but the ending was satisfying in a way, because you learn all about the Kingslayers by the end and get to confront Letho.

But you absolutely must play this game twice to get the whole experience.. (well actually you could probably start from a save at the end of chapter 1 on your second playthrough). Still, there's like a minimum of 40 hours of gameplay when you take that into consideration. Definitely worth the $30 bucks I spent IMO.

The game is not short, I keep encountering things in the game I never looked before during replays....I have completed it 7 times and I still feel it needs another 2*.

The game is very repayable, and the fact that they keep releasing content for it makes it well worth the money. I've got stuck on my second playthrough because of driver error stuff, but I intend to play it even more, and then the arena.

I'm not sure what people speak of with "dropped plot threads" though. Things came together rather nicely if you took the right path, and this is a game that tells you sternly that it won't accept the undedicated to try and weasel out its secrets. You must go and seek them yourself if you are interested, and I did and am so glad for it.

Sorry but this is a pile of bull crap. The 16 endings don't mean much. For example keeping Stennis aline or not doesn't change much of future quests. It's the same stuff 16 times.

There were really just 2 main (chapter 2) paths and 2 more that branched in chapter 3.

Someone needs to be reminded of how many bloody loading times TW1 had.

I agree. I'm currently on my second playthrough and it's only now that I see how all the threads intertwine and understand the different political agendas in the mix. It's also very interesting to see different sides of the story when taking the different Roche/Iorveth paths. I think CD Projekt RED should be applauded for coming up with a believable story that allows for this kind of divergence.

Every major character also seemed rather believable to me, each having their own agenda and motivations. The choices to me are what make it such a great _Role Playing_ game. It's complicated by Geralt being a fixed character and yet the choices he can make mostly (but perhaps not always) seem consistent with who he is. Plus the grayness of the choices is impressive.

The combat has been controversial but I also find the different skill trees to provide for replayability. In some ways, the different builds are only subtly different because Geralt can use all of swords, signs, potions etc. from the start but leveled up, the play style and tactical options differ enough for me.

/POSSIBLE SPOILERS
I actually found the ending to be very satisfactory. One of the best endings I've seen. I think, though, that it is very unusual for a video game. It's a type of ending that is more commonly seen in a series of novels (which is maybe what they intended, given the origins). There appear to be multiple story arcs. The mystery of the King Slayers is resolved (nicely, IMHO) but the overarching story arc of Geralt and the Wild Hunt, as well as the turmoil in the kingdoms, needs a whole new game to continue it. I don't think DLC or a full expansion could give it justice.

I eagerly await The Witcher 3 to see what happens. This is especially due to your decisions leading to key players either living or dying and different alliances being formed. Some may consider these different "endings" to be only subtlely different but I think they open up a wealth of options for the sequel. I hope CD Projekt RED can handle the complexity of carrying these different starting conditions over but if any studio can, they can. Not to mention that next time round, they won't face the battle of writing a new game engine so they can hopefully focus even more on the story and choices.
/POSSIBLE SPOILERS END

Regarding the length of the game, I don't think quoting hours to complete is
that easy. There's a huge difference between gamers. I also like the fact that they focused so heavily on the story rather than dungeon crawling (looking at you Dragon Age). Even in TW1, there seemed to be too much (insignificant) combat. Also, TW2 is a mature story meant to be played by adults. Many of us just don't have that much time to play. Shorter but deeper games are highly welcome.

I just bought this game Wednesday and beat it Saturday night, and I didn't start playing it until Thursday. I played maybe 5-6 hours a day. I had less than 20 hours into the game, maybe with my choices it sent me through the short version? I see people say theirs 16 different endings, I'll have to go through this game again and replay it. Maybe on medium/normal setting this time, easy was too easy. I wish they told you more on how to use the ore's and enhancements. Also, you should be able to master all of your characters upgrades (when you gain level) before even being close to the end of the game. I wasn't even done with the swordsman path level 30 character and didn't even own a weapon or armor with upgrading it's slots and I beat the game? blah. It was an awesome game, great story, great graphics, wish it were free roaming instead of having to stay on paths without jumping over obstacles, but I will re-rate it after the second run through. So far, I give it a 6/10 just for the fact that it was so short first time around, and I could've boughten skyrim instead lol.

lol! skyrim iz teh best cuz theres no story but shitlods of trees!Fukk yeah freedumb

Also, I don't know why people always say that traffic is bad in New York. I just shot at all of the cars with an Uzi and they got out of my way.

... That's to say that playing through on easy allows you to breeze through the game almost as though it's on God Mode, so of course you got through it quickly. By the way, you haven't actually finished the game until you've done at least 2 playthroughs with different choices, 4 if you actually want to see everything.

And Skyrim's pathetic attempt at a story dries up in a matter of hours and turns into a tree simulator, so the hilariousness of that last sentence of yours defies words.

I find it weird that you complain that the game was too easy and still insist on making it easier still.

So what would you have given it if it had been 80 hours long? Or 200, maybe 1000, or over 9000? Of course you can complain about the shortness of a game (I sometimes do), but I cannot fathom why the greatness of a game should be proportional to the time you have spent playing it.

It is. Things can unfold in a number of ways so hold on to those saves made before critical decisions.