Yeah if TW2 is a longer game (more content like sidequests, bigger world to explores, more secrets to discover, deeper skill progression tree) .. it certainly be able to match big names like Skyrim.

Thanks GuysI shall check it out... I just got through chapter 3 and I see what everyone is talking about... there are long cutscenes and hardly any missions! It is quite an anticlimax... they should complete the game and make it available to players for download... anyway I see now how this game kinda works in reverse... the best missions and exploration is in flotsam with the Kayran being the tough beast to beat and then we get to chapter 2 where the boss fight is wayyy easier than the Kayran leading to the short 3rd chapter...

Anyhow at least now I get to go see where Iorveths path takes me...

TW2 alleged "shortness" is totally justified when you take into account that:

a) Choices alter the entire game structure,
b) The amount of detail that goes into the world, it seems that locations are short but they are packed with things, very nicely designed and filled with details,
c) Most importantly, TW2 length is fine to me because of the fact that pretty much every quest is amazing. There is no filler in the game and every quest feels unique in some way or another.

From partying a night out with the blue stripes, to breaking a curse in an old mad house, it seems that every quest was special in one way or another. Even the contracts had interesting twists to them.

Even more, a lot of side-quests actually add to the main story with details and other stuff.

To me, there was never a dull moment with the game, and that's why I don't see the fact that its only 30 hours as long. TW1 had awesome quests as well, but it also had a lot of filler, some really boring sections, tons of backtracking and the presentation was clearly inferior.

Of course I want more! but I can't complain really, since I enjoyed every second of it and I am also doing multiple playthroughs.

I also feel the game was short but that is probably most due to me being neigh insatiable. You should pretty much play the game twice, as I have, so that actually makes it quite long if you account for that.

There is never any justification for making the game short. And for all those so called reasons you list let me say that almost all other games fit most is not all of them yet are much longer.

Time to be honest with yourself. the game was short and it should have been at least 50% longer.
This is another poor reason for trying to justify it being short. After all most if not all cRPG games pretty much require you to play through more than once.

Of course its a good reason! Between a 60 hour game that has few locations, repetitive fetch quests, fake choices and tons of backtracking, and a 30 hour game that has beautiful hand-crafted locations, meaningful choices that really impact the game, unique quests and never a dull moment, I prefer the latter.

Obviously this takes a lot more effort and time.

Finally, more length in a great game is obviously better (as long as it retains quality), but its not automatic that length = quality. Portal and Portal 2 are prime examples.

That's not to say that Act 3 shouldn't have had more content, but that's a different story.

I don't get all this "the game is short" bull. I am at the start of act 2 and have logged in about 35 hours. This projects to about 45 -50, even if act 3 is short.

Of course, if you skip the dialogue and side quests and speed through everything, then yes the game is short.

the game's plenty long enough, i just want more of it. :P

another 2 chapters after loc muinne to really see the impact of my choices would be great.

or witcher 3 would suffice...

On the contrary that is 100% the story. People are sying the game was too short because chapter 3 was rushed.
And your comment proves logically that the game was too short. You claim it was long enough but then immediately go and state that it really wasn't long enough. Can you honestly say that the resolutions in chapter three were done with the same care and quality as the other two chapters?

aside from the gameplay issues of weapons and armor, chapter 3 was fine. it tied up the kingslayer plotline and was a good place to end.

at the end of chapter 2/end of chapter 3, you make a ton of decisions that could lead to a whole game's worth of content. i'd like to see some expansions deal with that content. i'm not saying the original game is too short, i'm saying it created a desire for more. that's a good thing!

No, its different to say that the game is short to say that act 3 was rushed. Act 3 lost the pacing of the narrative, it felt unbalanced compared to other chapters, and the ending felt sudden.

But, if the game lasted exactly the same (say 30 hours), but Act 3 narrative was more cohesive, and lasted more (with the other 2 acts lasting a little less), it would be fine.

In other words, the problem isn't how many hours it lasts, the problem is that the ending feels sudden.

No. There is certainly nothing required about it. Never does it say you must play more than one play-through. Never does it say you cannot read or watch anything you missed online. Not to mention the multitudes of people that have not even played it again (a ton on tl.net).

Most people I have come to know do not even finish their games, Witcher 2 is no exception. I am the only person I know IRL that has even done a second play-through. Your utterly subjective statement on the matter is hardly representative of the objective judgement you attempt to relay.

I have a strong suspicion that you and your friends are under 30 years of age and maybe under 20.

I'm willing to bet anything that the majority of cRPG players finish the game at least once. And if people own games like KOTOR, BG, PST, Fallout, NWN etc that they have most certainly finished the game at least once.

You make a very simple and basic mistake. You assume that the world you see is representative of the world at large. It's not. And your experiences are not. I base my comments and positions on playing computer games for around 30 years now and reading about the industry.

And since you are so literal in my statement that most games require you to play it through twice I'll expand on that to enlighten you. By required I meant that to see all the content most games force a second playthrough and sometimes more than that. The games do NOT reveal all their content in a single playthrough as was the case with WE2. Because there is no person holding a gun to your head no games require anything in a 100% literal meaning.

Boy you sure complain a lot.

Wrong, I just told you that. "Your utterly subjective statement on the matter is hardly representative of the objective judgement you attempt to relay."

30 years of gaming should've been 30 years of reading apparently.