This is the first game that I'm replaying over and over again in a long time - the last one was Silent Hill 2, I think. I just love it so much.

It depends what people like to replay for, I guess? The story definitely makes more sense after a couple of replays and there's always something, a small detail, that you can discover. I always seem to gain more interest in different characters as I progress, so going back and seeing how they are portrayed from the beginning, what other characters have to say about them etc. is fun :)

Not to mention, some lines in dialogue become funny or gain another meaning if you know the whole story :D

There are a lot more variations to have in the story, other than the basic Iorveth/Roche decision. I finished my 10th playthrough the other day, and for each playthrough I've brought fresh ideas and concepts with me, to make them feel less of a repeat. Some involve importing a different save from TW1 (I loved meeting Siegfried outside Loc Muinne!), while others also involve first coming up with a character concept on how I should let Geralt relate to various situations I meet in the game. It is true that you don't always see immediate effects depending on your decisions - most of the results seem to be saved for future instalments (be they DLC's, expansions, or even TW3), but you still get a sort of wrap-up of what you can expect, during the final moments of Act 3. Most of the 16 endings of the game relate to who is alive and who is dead, and you should never underestimate the effects of having a powerful king such as Henselt killed, or what the pact between the La Valettes and Nilfgaard might bring to the table once the inevitable invasion begins, if you killed Aryan. Likewise, the consequences of having Letho implicate the sorceresses for the deaths of Demavend and Foltest, are much more severe than if you instead rescued Triss and had her bring forth evidence of Síle's involvement. Sure, chaos ensues in Loc Muinne no matter what, because of the dragon, but even the journal hints to how the coming witch hunt will be much more bloody and brutal, if Triss hadn't stepped forward to clear things up.

One of my favourite story choices in the game relates to Anais, actually. If you partnered up with Roche, she can either be given to John Natalis or King Radovid, or have Roche take her somewhere far away and protect her until she comes of age and can return to reclaim the throne. Apart from what is clearly stated in the game, you can tell that the consequences of either decision will be incredibly profound.

Two playthroughs (one with Iorveth and one with Roche) are enough to give the player the two most radically different game experiences, but people like me can easily play the game through many more times, and think of the less obvious story changes as just as intriguing and fun. I'm still not tired of TW2, and I will most certainly start yet another playthrough once I'm done with my current TW1 run (using FCR for the first time and loving it).

Besides, two playthroughs are a lot more replayability than you usually get in modern games - not counting shameful achievement hunts that force you to play the game multiple times - so I don't think anyone really has any grounds to file a complaint in this regard, even though I obviously share your lust for wanting more, more, more! I'm literally giddy with anticipation! :D

there's more variety other than that decision (I'd know) if you give Iorveth his sword or not, if you choose to save Triss and there are different cutscenes if you spare Stennis,Henselt or Aryan. I think you'll find the Gargoyle contract in chapter 3 particularly interesting since you find out more about the Wild Hunt through this sword in one of the chests there's also a bearded she elf somewhere.

although i bought the first witcher recently i didn't play much of it. i like to know what are the significance of the choices we did in witcher 1 and how it reflects in witcher 2.

i believe there are many choices that player mentioned that they did in the first witcher, but how huge are the impact and consequences that we saw it in witcher 2? or are they just appearing as cameos with a few text line of conversation.

is saving adda from first witcher we can actually see her with radovid? i'm not sure about this but what i'm trying to highlight here is although we have many choices to be made in witcher 2, it'll probably just be streamlined and linearize in witcher 3 like how it was done in witcher 1 and witcher 2. i'm not sure.

if there were indeed of different variations of how the story and plot will played out in the next sequel of witcher, for example if henselt was killed or spared, if freeing saskia from being spellbound, spared or kill letho or sile, etc. it will be a great huge of work to be done if those were considered in the plot for the next witcher.

And you can get a peek at Bernard Loredo's mom through the window while sneaking into Loredo's courtyard to eavesdrop at Sile.

There are two kinds of replayability--immediate replayability that comes from being able to experience the same story in a different way (as in Iorveth or Roche), and long-term replayability that comes from a compelling story.

In the short-term, two playthroughs is enough. You likely still won't see everything, but everything important to the story can be experienced in two goes. Longer-term, however, is an entirely different story. The narrative in Witcher 2 is gripping and I imagine I'll end up being drawn back to it several more times in the long run.

For me, another kind of replayability stems from just trying out different builds - each of the skill tree + hybrids. Granted such replayability is somewhat dependent on having good gameplay and also good story (plus those little things that you discover during each playthrough - whether it's something funny an NPC said, or whether it's immersion-breaking infinitely-respawning guards, or whether it's a note you found that sheds light on the plot etc.)

I agree with moat all of the thoughts posted here, but the main reason that I still replay this game is to flesh out all the dialogue choices and thereby getting a more complete understanding of the story.

There are so many dialogue choices that it is impossible to exhaust them all at each playthrough, so numerous replays are needed to divulge all of the possible storylines.

I totally agree with ya Peetz.

The game appears shorter on a single play through, however it isn't finished as additional play throughs are necessary to eek out all the bits of info hiding inside the story and choices made along the way.

WOO HOO! Game time... =D

Well, there are some worthwhile different outcomes on the Roche path. Kindo discussed some of these in more detail in his post above. This path calls out for multiple replays, at least from mid-Act 2 if maybe not from the beginning.

I don't know whether the Iorveth path rewards multiple replays with different decisions as strongly.