GameBanshee Forums

Posted: **Tue Nov 20, 2007 12:31 am**

@Xandax

If you have a problem with me, it would suit you better to take it up with me, instead of twice mentioning my statement as a (sarcastic) comment used to reply to others. Better to go direct to the source then tip-toe around.

I have no problem with you, Xandax. And I 'm never one to tiptoe around, you should know better by now.

I am starting a new thread where we can continue our friendly discussion of realism in a fantasy game etc., free of D&D virgins' taint.

Posted: **Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:15 pm**

Let me start off with "I do not own this game"
But I want to. The thing is, is it just me or are you people blowing this all out of proportion? Is there that much nudity? Is there that much potty-talk?
How so? Because I've read reviews that say its not that bad, so it seems like you guys are just a bit riled up. Just my take. I want this game for a decent story and fun experience.

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2008 4:53 am**

My very first post and no, I'm not a troll, just posting some concerns and thoughts. Besides, I think I might've had an account here a long time ago except well... I don't have most of my old email accounts anymore.

Hmmm... all this talk about many cutscenes sort of worries me. I was hoping to get this game soon but maybe it'll be put on the backburner 'cos I've never enjoyed watching tons of "mini-movies". This aspect strongly reminds me of what would happen if one produced a $45 million third-rate(tons of inane dialogues and puzzles) adventure game modeled visually after say FF:AC or Oblivion. I don't enjoy sitting through scene after scene of movies: many designers aren't movie directors. And these days, quite a lot of people tend to associate big budget = very awesome game.

And although the aspects of having various "heavy" topics appeals to me, this isn't the only game to have done that whether it be just touching briefly or dwelving into it. There's one series(a very old one... need to recall name) by Sierra which dared to imply or mention a little about stuff like rape, wedlock, caste systems and even have chars who were greyish, etc. And that was in the late 80s to 90s.

And then you've got games like PS:T which is really heavy and even a bit of deep/grey stuff in BG1 and 2, a bit of light stuff regarding children in Divine Divinity and some of the newer games. And there're possibly console games as well which I know little about. So, no... it's not that new except this game has an in-depth exploration of heavy topics.

Also, the manner in which some of the topics like genocide, rape, etc., are implemented sound trivial, superficial and completely "in your face" whereas many current events are more along a mixture of subtlety and shades of obviousness where only a few groups really know what's going on until it hits the entire society in waves and cycles. For a very simple but not well-done example: think of the sand in an hourglass flowing from one side to the other and people standing on both sides. The sand represents the issues and those on both sides may or may not realise the situation.

Finally, the juxtaposition of modern concepts into a medieval society sounds a little ... out of place since stuff like guerrilla warfare, terrorism, etc. were born out of modern society(politics, economy, etc.) and technology like tanks, machine guns, bombs, rocket launchers, etc. which allowed you to attack swiftly until you ran out of ammunition. If I'm not mistaken, that is.

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2008 5:57 am**

Raito wrote:<snip>
Finally, the juxtaposition of modern concepts into a medieval society sounds a little ... out of place since stuff like guerrilla warfare, terrorism, etc. were born out of modern society(politics, economy, etc.) and technology like tanks, machine guns, bombs, rocket launchers, etc. which allowed you to attack swiftly until you ran out of ammunition. If I'm not mistaken, that is.

You are mistaken. Concepts of "Guerrilla warfare" and "terrorism" etc are not new by any means. In many conflicts of back to ancient times, similar concepts existed and was utilized.
As for your references to tanks and artillery I simply do not understand why its made however, those are by far not new either.
Tanks have been utilized for ages, just in the form of cavalry (heavy, light, archery cavalry, chariots and so on), and artillery is not new either (archers, especially think british long bow). The concepts of warfare is far from new, it is just the "tools" which change.

As for The Witcher, then those concepts are not made "out of place" ("terrorism" if one can call it that), and the only thing one truly can come with is the "language" which I see as very small nitpicking, as it all takes place in a fictive universe anyway, and people just seem to equate fantasy and fantasy roleplay with some sort of pseudo-type "old English" speech. "Thou, thee".

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2008 6:18 am**

Xandax wrote:You are mistaken. Concepts of "Guerrilla warfare" and "terrorism" etc are not new by any means. In many conflicts of back to ancient times, similar concepts existed and was utilized.
As for your references to tanks and artillery I simply do not understand why its made however, those are by far not new either.
Tanks have been utilized for ages, just in the form of cavalry (heavy, light, archery cavalry, chariots and so on), and artillery is not new either (archers, especially think british long bow). The concepts of warfare is far from new, it is just the "tools" which change.

As for The Witcher, then those concepts are not made "out of place" ("terrorism" if one can call it that), and the only thing one truly can come with is the "language" which I see as very small nitpicking, as it all takes place in a fictive universe anyway, and people just seem to equate fantasy and fantasy roleplay with some sort of pseudo-type "old English" speech. "Thou, thee".

Ooh... didn't know that at all: I guess there's always something new to be learnt.

As for terrorism, I'm looking that up now... the term was first coined during the French Revolution. Before that, I wonder how attitudes towards "terrorism" were.

Nah, I ain't too concerned with the usage of common language. And to be blunt, I find that using "thou, thee" pretty silly unless you're writing a play. Though... I find it kinda silly that people would cram vulgarities into much of their everyday speech. Apart from speech, there are many ways to be direct and crude, after all.

I'm much more curious about how the themes like war, genocide, rape, etc. are implemented and stuff. And I'll see what others think about that.

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2008 6:25 am**

Since I'm quite familliar with the topic, the writer, and polish reality, I feel I should make a contribution to the discussion.

Dragon Wench, great point. Poland is definetely NOT a good place to be a woman, especially fantasy-liking, and Sapkowski is partly responsible for this. Since his books were the almost-only fantasy books ever to be even talked about by litterature critics, everyone sees him as a model, an ideal to be imitated. And he is the one responsible for clenching tight together fantasy and sexual violence, rape, beating women and abusing them. He, and his fans, claim that "this is real writing, not lying and sugary-dreaming". But none of them remember that people are influenced by reading about such behaviour. There are different ways to describe, for example, sexual activities. They can be either "lovemaking", or F-ing. Sexual violence can be described like an atrocious crime, or like a "normal" passtime for any armed male, like "oh, this is the way of the world, my dear...". Sapkowski does the latter, and leaves it for the readers to judge, which is one of the worst things you can do. Because people are not intelligent, sensitive and considerate. They tend to get fascinated by having an opportunity to touch such a taboo, and it stimulates their imagination, when not explictly condemned. Almost always.
That is why, on two out of three fantasy-conventions I have been taking part in, there were people who demanded that rape be included as an activity to perform, if you want to. They did not find that idea at Tolkien's. IMO, such people should be placed under police custody, because they are likely to take their fantasies elsewhere, and hurt someone.
The books in themselves could be very well described "a teenager's wet-dream", even if the author is forty. We all know that inside every adult man there's a teenager waiting to get out

Just look at the main character - a "better man", a master swordsman, philosopher, scientist (genetics, anyone?), alchemist, mighty strong, tough, intelligent, wise, attractive to all (and I mean all, in no book you will find a woman that shall not wet her pants on seeing him) women, fearsome to all men, capable of making specific, mysterious magic, always winning, then drinking hectoliters of alcohol, then having sex with legions of women... uff. And that's only the start of it. No wonder the books are so popular, and no wonder the game imitates that. But should it really? The main reason for being so "faithful" to Sapkowski's, let's face it, medium - quality writing, was to make money on his fans. And this "faithfulness" is the main reason why it looks like a teenager's wet-dream.

That said, the game has its good points, with different combat styles, potions you can make, and signs you can cast. I suggest that anyone out there who does not like the sex part just say "no, thanks", anyone who does not like cursing click trough the conversation, or turn the volume down, and enjoy other features. And if you do, take pride from not being a D&D high shool nerd

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2008 6:49 am**

QuenGalad wrote:<snip>The main reason for being so "faithful" to Sapkowski's, let's face it, medium - quality writing, was to make money on his fans. And this "faithfulness" is the main reason why it looks like a teenager's wet-dream.<snip>

Well, of course games are made to make money of the "fans".
However, this is like saying that the main reason that a Star Wars game is faithful to Star Wars lore is to make money of the fans. Or that D&D games use the World/Lore is to make money of the fans as well.
That is a simplification of the issue.
One reason that games stay "faithful" to the lore is to have a framework within which the story takes place and to have the "player" know of the action/consequences within the game.

I personally never encountered the books, have never read anything about them (prior to this discussion), and most certainly did not buy the game because I'm a "fan" or because I'm a "teenager" (or there is a teenager wanting to come out).
I did it because the game offers a more deep roleplay feel and a nice change of pace and setting from the RPG-Lites which are mainstay from companies like Bioware, Bethesda and such. And if the sexual content rubs people the wrong way, or it is "too much" in the game, then that is their preference, however it is not "right" or "wrong". Then there are alternatives.
But personally - I'm glad they staid faithful, cause otherwise the setting would perhaps feel less complete and fluent, and I might just as well play those RPG-lites, which are afraid to move outside the norm of cookie-cutter worlds.

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:08 am**

QuenGalad wrote:Since I'm quite familliar with the topic, the writer, and polish reality, I feel I should make a contribution to the discussion.

Dragon Wench, great point. Poland is definetely NOT a good place to be a woman, especially fantasy-liking, and Sapkowski is partly responsible for this. Since his books were the almost-only fantasy books ever to be even talked about by litterature critics, everyone sees him as a model, an ideal to be imitated. And he is the one responsible for clenching tight together fantasy and sexual violence, rape, beating women and abusing them. He, and his fans, claim that "this is real writing, not lying and sugary-dreaming". But none of them remember that people are influenced by reading about such behaviour. There are different ways to describe, for example, sexual activities. They can be either "lovemaking", or F-ing. Sexual violence can be described like an atrocious crime, or like a "normal" passtime for any armed male, like "oh, this is the way of the world, my dear...". Sapkowski does the latter, and leaves it for the readers to judge, which is one of the worst things you can do. Because people are not intelligent, sensitive and considerate. They tend to get fascinated by having an opportunity to touch such a taboo, and it stimulates their imagination, when not explictly condemned. Almost always.
That is why, on two out of three fantasy-conventions I have been taking part in, there were people who demanded that rape be included as an activity to perform, if you want to. They did not find that idea at Tolkien's. IMO, such people should be placed under police custody, because they are likely to take their fantasies elsewhere, and hurt someone.
The books in themselves could be very well described "a teenager's wet-dream", even if the author is forty. We all know that inside every adult man there's a teenager waiting to get out Just look at the main character - a "better man", a master swordsman, philosopher, scientist (genetics, anyone?), alchemist, mighty strong, tough, intelligent, wise, attractive to all (and I mean all, in no book you will find a woman that shall not wet her pants on seeing him) women, fearsome to all men, capable of making specific, mysterious magic, always winning, then drinking hectoliters of alcohol, then having sex with legions of women... uff. And that's only the start of it. No wonder the books are so popular, and no wonder the game imitates that. But should it really? The main reason for being so "faithful" to Sapkowski's, let's face it, medium - quality writing, was to make money on his fans. And this "faithfulness" is the main reason why it looks like a teenager's wet-dream.

Yikes!!! That sounds really juvenile. And your description of Geralt in his books sounds a lot like Anita Blake. Once, I had to choose between Pokemon games and 12 books of Anita Blake. I read all the books instead. Never again!

In Anita Blake, the female is some sort of super-heroine who is all-supreme queen of this and that: she can raise the dead, she has super "unique" powers and she can do many things no one else can including attracting males by the masses. And get this: almost ALL the males are dying to screw her and will do anything to get laid including screwing one another. This includes her "fiancee", her "harem of lovers" and almost everyone else. And oh wait... almost everyone worships her as a goddess too. Books like that only demoralise the cast and portray both genders as utter morons.

Give me stuff like Fahrenheit 451, Big Brother and anything(fantasy, sci-fi, mystery, etc.) with well-crafted writing instead.

It doesn't even have to be a novel, it could be a short story or even comics(Fables, etc.) too.

As for violence and sick stuff, I don't mind it except for rape against females or males or children. There're many ways to deal with such issues as opposed to jamming it into your face unless your reasons are justified. Like how rape was dealt with in the movie Monster... totally in your face but also kinda interesting take on "morality". Otherwise, it becomes rather insensitive and trite.

That said, the game has its good points, with different combat styles, potions you can make, and signs you can cast. I suggest that anyone out there who does not like the sex part just say "no, thanks", anyone who does not like cursing click trough the conversation, or turn the volume down, and enjoy other features. And if you do, take pride from not being a D&D high shool nerd

Hmmm... while that sounds pretty cool, I can't see why I'd pick up this game if it's so shallow. If I really want good action, there's always DD.

Besides, right now, I'm playing Eschalon even though I have little RPG experience: it's just so challenging and fun.

Besides, any good game will offer interesting dialogues too.

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:16 am**

You can stay "faithful" to some universe without reproducing its mistakes. I myself have enough evil in the real world, and my liking of what you look down on as a cookie-cutter is not due to fear of bypassing it, or being a prude, but of a need to take a breath, to find an alternative to all this muck of a real world. If you like to plunge into it even more in your free time, you've got the right to do it, but don't blame me for regretting that.

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2008 7:39 am**

QuenGalad wrote:You can stay "faithful" to some universe without reproducing its mistakes. I myself have enough evil in the real world, and my liking of what you look down on as a cookie-cutter is not due to fear of bypassing it, or being a prude, but of a need to take a breath, to find an alternative to all this muck of a real world. If you like to plunge into it even more in your free time, you've got the right to do it, but don't blame me for regretting that.

Good point. And you can also touch on such topics without plunging the game into some "eternal kingdom of insanity".

Interesting opinions, there.

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:05 am**

Great discussion, albeit heated at times.

Now consider....The Witcher is actually the best RPG to come out in 2007 in mainstream media

How'd like them apples?

It's just sad, really sad, that there are so few truly great RPGs, and ofcourse its a strict matter of taste and money when we are talking RPGs.

PS: I never knew about the background for The Witcher, so thank you for elucidating the unkempt and ignorant masses QuenGalad

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:46 am**

QuenGalad wrote:You can stay "faithful" to some universe without reproducing its mistakes. I myself have enough evil in the real world, and my liking of what you look down on as a cookie-cutter is not due to fear of bypassing it, or being a prude, but of a need to take a breath, to find an alternative to all this muck of a real world. If you like to plunge into it even more in your free time, you've got the right to do it, but don't blame me for regretting that.

But is it a "mistake"? Simply because you dislike the element, does not make it a mistake or any way "wrong".

Taking specific elements from the settings and declaring it a "mistake" is a bit on the arrogant side in my view. Sexual content apparently is an integral part of the protagonist in the setting. So it would likely have been a larger mistake to not include it, like it would have been to not include core D&D elements in a D&D game, or core Star Wars elements in a Star War games and so on.

It comes down to preferences whether or not you can live with, or like, the elements, but one can't say that it is a mistake, not relevant to the setting, or similar to include them, when it stays "true" to the framework of the setting.

Posted: **Wed Jan 16, 2008 11:03 am**

It's not the case of me "simply noy liking it", Xandax. You can "simply not like" apples, or coffee. I have stated before why I see it wrong. If it amounts to "simply not liking" in your eyes, then all I can say is that your sensitivity to such matters is far smaller then mine. And I am not judging it in any way. Perhaps I am being over-touchy here.
As to declaring the game "mature and not afraid to touch difficult matters", I would say it takes something more to do that. If a game shows us children slaves to be bought somewhere, it is not "touching the problem of child slavery" yet. You need some discussion, some talk about it, if you want to touch the matter. If Geralt is told by a waitress that her husband beats her, and he can't even ask "why?" or "why don't you complain to the priests?" or anything, this is not a case of the game bravely taking up the problem of family violence. It is a case of strange and suspicious obstination on hurting females, which the game definetely has, and seeing it as an integral, unchangeable, and not in a needing a change, part of the universe. Which is, yes, only in my humble oppinion, wrong.

Posted: **Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:55 am**

I do understand what the creator of this thread is saying. He or she completely fails to see the fun in it. Creating a moral then is the result of such an inability. Most-likely he/she bought the game with given expectations in mind and simply was not pleased by what he or she found. This happens just as you can choose the wrong answer in one of those many dialogues. And yes, sometimes the one answer you wish to give is not among the options. Do I then cry about it? No. If I would I would be too young to play this game.

Sven

Posted: **Fri Jan 18, 2008 6:41 am**

QuenGalad wrote:If Geralt is told by a waitress that her husband beats her, and he can't even ask "why?" or "why don't you complain to the priests?" or anything, this is not a case of the game bravely taking up the problem of family violence.

I don't think you've got the point here. This phrase wasn't implied to "touch some problem" at all, it's there to better describe the world of Witcher, to deepen the atmosphere of it: there are a lot a problems there and you, as a protagonist, can solve your share of them, but you can't solve them all - which makes this world "mature", not something like "and they lived happily ever after".

Posted: **Fri Jan 18, 2008 9:49 am**

I know. I'm just trying to point out that bashing you between the eyes with things like that is not neccesarily an act of very-matureish problem discussion. I agree it is more realistic than "lived happily etc", but it's not exactly an act of great courage and such, as it was declared before in this discussion.

Posted: **Wed Feb 06, 2008 3:32 am**

dcb wrote:It's like a group of D&D high school virgins got together and made a video game full of all the sex they never had, violence they never dished out, and cuss words their parents never let them say. Look, just because it contains elements of sex, extreme violence, and adult humor (and I use that term lightly) doesn't mean it's a "mature" game
(edit)…

My subjective impressions...I have played through three times and this is my fourth. I am far from sated. And I think that the mature rating is very appropriate. In fact while I also gave this game to my 18 yo son to play I do not allow my 14 yo son to do so. He insisted that he 'has seen boobies before and his friends use worse word that'...etc...and he is right, but I do not think that the frontal nudity nor the curse words are the crux of what makes this game mature in nature.

dcb wrote:Not to mention the incredibly awkward voice dialogue. Are the voices themselves good? Yes. Does the dialogue make sense and flow from topic to topic seemlessly? Absolutely not. It is incredibly poor in that sense. Maybe you can argue there's just something lost in the language translation, (edit)….

I have downloaded the Polish patch and the dialogues in the uncensored version is even richer, though I can see where many of their textures were lost in translation, the heart of the dialogue has remained unblemished. Having lived abroad in non-English speaking countries, I can vouch first had that English is not an easy language to translate into.

severian wrote:Hello, it's me - one of those D&D virgins that made The Witcher.

(edit)...

My personal advise – if you already bought The Witcher… give it second chance and try to play a little more. I promise you will find that it goes beyond “dwarf cock”

Greetings severian, it is an honor...and standing ovation to you and all of the creators !

This game refreshingly departs from the standard scale of lawful good>chaotic good>.....neutral......Chaotic evil> Lawful evil formats, where in you build a character based on alignment and then make your choices accordingly from a carefully crafted foolproof list of dialogues. Instead it takes a much more realistic approach of making tough call after tough call usually forcing you to chose the lesser of two evils only to have the consequences come back to bite you in the butt when you least expect it.

If any of you have ever spent time in the ‘rougher’ parts of town you would know that the npc’s as well as the main character behave in a very normal fashion. Cursing, drug use, prostitution, bigotry. Prejudice, misogynism, territorialism, are all part of REAL human behavior.

I view this game as a reflection of timeless issues set in a beautifully crafted period setting heightened by brilliant graphics and tough real life choices.

This game deals with genocide, feudalism, religious fanaticism, preditation, political intrigue, terrorism, and other social illnesses which we currently face and have faced throughout history. The more base side of humanity can not be candy coated if it is to ring true and this game knows that.

This is a dark and gritty game which leaves me only sorry that I do not speak Polish because I would sorely love to read the books by which it was inspired.

As a parent of four children ranging in age from 7 to 25 two boys and two girls, I feel that while all of these things enrich this game to a level I have never before seen, they also make it inappropriate for the younger players. Children will have to deal with all of these issues as they grow into adults and hopefully, with their parent’s guidance to strengthen them along the way. But a video game is not the way for a child to learn about the more banal side of human nature.

And as far as the cut scenes and scripting go, imho, they were neither intrusive nor overdone. In fact, they even added a touch of realism wherein you are NOT in control of the events at the time,and again, this is something that rings very true to real life.

I for one think the writing was done well. No, it is not on par with a novel, but then again, it is a game meant to ‘feel’ like a novel, but not be a novel, and it succeeds handsomely in that respect.

I have recommended it to several friends who are now tell me that they are enjoying it as much as I have. And I want to thank DW for recommending it to me

Gods I hate long posts

Posted: **Thu Feb 07, 2008 2:28 am**

QuenGalad wrote:Since I'm quite familliar with the topic, the writer, and polish reality, I feel I should make a contribution to the discussion.

Dragon Wench, great point. Poland is definetely NOT a good place to be a woman, especially fantasy-liking, and Sapkowski is partly responsible for this. Since his books were the almost-only fantasy books ever to be even talked about by litterature critics, everyone sees him as a model, an ideal to be imitated. And he is the one responsible for clenching tight together fantasy and sexual violence, rape, beating women and abusing them. He, and his fans, claim that "this is real writing, not lying and sugary-dreaming". But none of them remember that people are influenced by reading about such behaviour. There are different ways to describe, for example, sexual activities. They can be either "lovemaking", or F-ing. Sexual violence can be described like an atrocious crime, or like a "normal" passtime for any armed male, like "oh, this is the way of the world, my dear...". Sapkowski does the latter, and leaves it for the readers to judge, which is one of the worst things you can do. Because people are not intelligent, sensitive and considerate. They tend to get fascinated by having an opportunity to touch such a taboo, and it stimulates their imagination, when not explictly condemned. Almost always.
That is why, on two out of three fantasy-conventions I have been taking part in, there were people who demanded that rape be included as an activity to perform, if you want to. They did not find that idea at Tolkien's. IMO, such people should be placed under police custody, because they are likely to take their fantasies elsewhere, and hurt someone.
The books in themselves could be very well described "a teenager's wet-dream", even if the author is forty. We all know that inside every adult man there's a teenager waiting to get out Just look at the main character - a "better man", a master swordsman, philosopher, scientist (genetics, anyone?), alchemist, mighty strong, tough, intelligent, wise, attractive to all (and I mean all, in no book you will find a woman that shall not wet her pants on seeing him) women, fearsome to all men, capable of making specific, mysterious magic, always winning, then drinking hectoliters of alcohol, then having sex with legions of women... uff. And that's only the start of it. No wonder the books are so popular, and no wonder the game imitates that. But should it really? The main reason for being so "faithful" to Sapkowski's, let's face it, medium - quality writing, was to make money on his fans. And this "faithfulness" is the main reason why it looks like a teenager's wet-dream.

That said, the game has its good points, with different combat styles, potions you can make, and signs you can cast. I suggest that anyone out there who does not like the sex part just say "no, thanks", anyone who does not like cursing click trough the conversation, or turn the volume down, and enjoy other features. And if you do, take pride from not being a D&D high shool nerd

So British author Ian Flemming writes novels about womanizing, gun-slinging, intelligent, wise-cracking, martini-drinking, always winning, attractive to all (and I mean all) women, super secret "00" MI6 agent James Bond and it's ok, but a Polish author creates a strikingly (and I'm thinking maybe it wasn't completely accidental) similar character in Geralt of Rivia and suddenly him and 50% of Poland's population are all vile deviants? Sorry, but I will disagree with you here, with respect. I just cannot buy your argument that his books are trash. At least, that's the feeling I got from your post.

Yes I have played the game (and liked it a lot), no I don't really know much of anything about Poland or this Sapkowski, and I haven't read the books. Thus I can't directly respond to your allegations about "clenching tight together fantasy and sexual violence, rape, beating women and abusing them", although I can't help but guess that they may be unfair.

But...I will defend his right to write entertainment for his (i'm guessing) largely male audience who (i'm guessing again) are largely not "DnD highschool nerds". Geralt is simply a James Bond sent 800 years into the past and dressed up a bit so that his story is "mature". And what are Bond and Geralt really but superheroes in Comic Book-like stories marketed to adult men in the 18-35 range. Sure a line has to be drawn between entertainment and smut, but I don't feel Geralt and the Witcher cross this line at all.

Also, I just don't believe that everyone who reads about rape will then go out and do it. This is the same argument people like Jack Thompson use in trying to censor/ban violent and/or sexually suggestive video games here in the USA.

As you may have discerned from the above, I'm a sucker for freedom of speech. I believe people can write what they want as the alternative would be the far greater evil. In the US these days, people seem very concerned about being as politically correct as possible so they don't offend anyone. This is a bit stuffy, IMO, and it was refreshing to get a game from outside this country where the developer was more interested in creating an entertaining game world. You can really tell the difference between the Witcher and a game like NWN 2.

Posted: **Thu Feb 07, 2008 5:39 pm**

As far as I can see there are a lot of posts about this game being bad for reasons that are actually showing why this society as a whole has big problems, especially the US. For example, to have such reactions about anything sexual seems completely ridiculous. Basically it all derives from the monstrous assumption that pleasure is bad, evil or whatever. This comes from, not entirely, but mostly, the church and her overlong influence on all nations, some more than others. People that are especially vocal about not liking the witcher come from the mainstream rpg pool. which mostly refers to games like nwn.

Now I personaly enjoyed nwn, but if you are going to say that killing hordes of guards, that is people, is a normal thing, and seeing nudity is not, than, well something is very wrong indeed. Now I know this is not the main reason, though of course it's propostreus, but anyone that does say things against it based on nudity and the like can only be excused for it if they have only played sports games their entire life. Because basically every other game, especially rpgs has a whole lot of murder in it, which is infinetly worse than sex Smiley Or is it? Maybe it isn't. Well In some nations you can get stoned for having sex...

Now, this game has another aspect that differentiates it from others, and that is story based, not combat based. Some people think that roleplaying is mostly building up your character and battling stuff, and all the different ways you can do it. I don't, I believe that roleplaying is the ability to get into the role, and the best catalyst for that is story. That is of course just my opinion. So basically what I propose is to stop all these discussions and simply say that the witcher and games like it (though very rare) like torment, belong to a certain type of genre, like say SDRPG, or story driven rpgs. Which is better is the choice of the player (though that's like saying spiderman could be a better movie than say the pianist or some other good film, but no matter.) The point is, you can continue playing nwn and be happy when you say to a woman that you think she's hot and she gets so insulted it's like the end of the world, and you can be happy with that. Just leave other people to enjoy things that they find interesting...

Sorry for my english it's not my native language....

Posted: **Mon Feb 18, 2008 8:20 pm**

the F word (I say this so you know what I'm talking about without the censoring on this website, not because I fear the usage of the word) is a simple acronym.

11 pages in, I'm not sure if anyone brought this up..but no..no its not.
This has been debunked so many times I can't believe people are still claiming that.