... and I am dissappointed by the lack of action. Yes, the way they present a great story is well done, but looking at the RPG elements of TW2 I don't like what I saw.

Lack of fighting made me feel like taking potions was a pure annoyance, not something that made my character actually superior. It's hard to compare Geralt with/without potions when you have so few fights.

Also, the story was very compact in itself. Only little and short sidequests. What about those epic sidequests of TW1? There were plenty of them!

Looking back at Witcher 1 (played enhanced edition), only one thing comes into my mind: how amazed I was that despite those complex and dependent quests I never stumpled across a single quest bug. It buffled my mind.

Doing the same for Witcher 2 I think of wasting tons of time in the inventory and the urge of fighting enemies not getting satisfied for the whole game.

All in all, the game started off very nice (chapter 1), only to become a little boring in chapter 2 (terrible inventory, too weak quests, too little fighting) and probably finishing with my most favourite chapter 3(I rushed through to the action, couldn't stand any more sidequests; the dragon fight was one of the few boss fights I liked).

Considering I have big hopes for upcoming patches fixing at least the input bug and the ugly inventory system I am sure I will take another look at TW2 in the future and it's worth it's 44€. But then again, TW1 was by far better, even if it might be a bit unfair to compare both as I played a finished version of TW1.


60% Story -> 40%
30% inventory browsing -> 10%
10% fighting -> 40%
0% skillpath decisions/character development -> 10%

please.

What difficulty it was?

normal.
I also didn't rush, if I'd take a guess I'd say I played 30 hours?

Try different path on difficult. It would be much harder combat wise. Or look for mods

I never complained about the difficulty.

I agree...also there were like 5x more enemies in TW1 to slash around

I liked the fact that there weren't hordes of enemies to hack through. I still cringe when I remember the swamps from Witcher 1.

Witcher 1 had "epic" sidequests? I remember very nice mainquests, but sidequests consisted mostly of killing monster x or bringing y back.

This. I remember running away from the monsters in that swamp every time i heard the combat music poppin' up.

I loved the game. I just wished it was a little longer. But on the positive side you can replay the game and take the opposite side and have a different game experience.

They made a terrible choice with this. Think could of made the game an additional chapter long, instead of forcing you to play it again.

Sane choice for the sake of non-linearity tbh. No one is forcing you to do anything. You can just accept the ending that you got and don't care how things would play out on the other side and call it a day. Gerald's presence has an impact on events in either path. Besides, considering how the story unfolds, it would be hard to continue after Loc Muine without leaving even more story threads unresolved.

I had all my points except 3 in alchemy, and I had no trouble what so ever.

This is a RPG, not an hack'n'slash.

I'm grateful as hell that we didn't spent 90 % of the game fighting ridiculous amount of foes, but rather somewhat believable confrontations that show Geralt as superhuman but still within reason.

The only point I do agree with you is the absurdity of having to enter meditation to take a potion, but GOD PLEASE not "MOAR FIGHTS !". The interface is already dumbed down for console, if the game also is there will be nothing to salvage.