GameBanshee Forums

Lady Dragonfly wrote:Yes, there is a need, if you keep all your stuff with him. You might need that stuff soon. Way too soon. Of course, more plants can be gathered and more monsters' organs harvested and more potions brewed... If you know what is coming... And there is always an option to replay. :mischief: Or restart...



How about a looong cutscene immediately followed by an insanely difficult battle, totally unexpected, without any possibility to prepare? Or to save the game? How many times did you personally click through that particular cutscene before you won? (Argh, The Short Guide! Priceless.) Were you, perchance, tempted to utter a few mature idioms, while clicking away?

I am not giving up playing this game, maybe it will really get better story-wise etc. So far, nothing beats Gothic. Not even close.

What did you keep with the inn keeper that you had a pressing need for? I keep the potions I mostly use on me while everything else goes into the stash. Once you lose access to the inn keeper the next chapter is only 15 mins away.

As for the cutscnes after the cave, rapid left clicking gets you through the first cutscene and esc skips the second cutscene and straight to the battle.
As for the chapter boss I had to reload 3 times, aard and deathblow equals instant victory!

RiceBall wrote: As for the cutscnes after the cave, rapid left clicking gets you through the first cutscene and esc skips the second cutscene and straight to the battle.
As for the chapter boss I had to reload 3 times, aard and deathblow equals instant victory!

Even clicking through all the cutscenes 3 times is annoying. To me. Clicking >50 times -- more than annoying. And what if you don't have aard developed enough? And most of your potions and blade-enhancement stuff are with the dead inkeeper? And you cannot leave the area? And even if you have a potion or two with you, it is suicidal to drink one during a fight? And you cannot save the game? Even if the next chapter is just 15 min away, you still have to survive to make it there. And you cannot survive without aard, potions, devil's luck, and multiple, multiple, multiple reloads. Are you saying that you haven't heard other people complaining about that issue?

Maybe it because I'm playing the game on medium difficulty but I didn't need to use any pots or weapons enhancements from the moment of the inn battle until the beast fight. I've dumped three bronze talents total in aard. It generally knocks everything down, great for crowd control. Needed one swallow pot to keep me alive during the beast fight while I ran around waiting for my endurance to recharge so I could aard it. Are you trying to keep abigail alive during the entire fight? She can't be killed only knocked uncouscious for the duration of the battle. If you find the battle too hard, hand abigail over to the villagers, they'll help during the boss battle. Most forum post I've seen believe you have to keep abigial alive.

You can save right before the beast fight and after the cutscene if your quick with the f5 button

Yes, I know all this. My point is you cannot win UNLESS you have aard II AND both enhancements. The game is generally easy up to that point. Then, suddenly, you get a hell of a fight on your hands, without any warning. Why was it necessary to throw in that stupid super-difficult boss encounter right after two (!) cutscenes? Do you think this is a sign of a good, clever game design?
I would also like to say a thing or two about so-called "dialogue options". It boils down to yes/no, basically. Nothing else in between. Are you bastard with us or against us? -I am against you bastards. - Then you bastard die. - No, you bastards die.

Lady Dragonfly wrote:Yes, there is a need, if you keep all your stuff with him. You might need that stuff soon. Way too soon. Of course, more plants can be gathered and more monsters' organs harvested and more potions brewed... If you know what is coming... And there is always an option to replay. :mischief: Or restart...
<snip>

That's inventory management. I learned quickly that alchemy was important, so I'd keep the stuff I need for alchemy on my character and stuff I didn't need for it in storage.

Lady Dragonfly wrote: How about a looong cutscene immediately followed by an insanely difficult battle, totally unexpected, without any possibility to prepare? Or to save the game? How many times did you personally click through that particular cutscene before you won? (Argh, The Short Guide! Priceless.) Were you, perchance, tempted to utter a few mature idioms, while clicking away?
<snip>

If it was the one you think off, then twice. But only cause I thought the NPC "died" which she didn't.

Lady Dragonfly wrote:Yes, I know all this. My point is you cannot win UNLESS you have aard II AND both enhancements.<snip>

Well, you can, but - alas....

Lady Dragonfly wrote:Yes, I know all this. My point is you cannot win UNLESS you have aard II AND both enhancements. The game is generally easy up to that point. Then, suddenly, you get a hell of a fight on your hands, without any warning. Why was it necessary to throw in that stupid super-difficult boss encounter right after two (!) cutscenes? Do you think this is a sign of a good, clever game design?

I beat the Beast on medium on my third attempt and was real close on my second. I tried to use aard but never got the knockdown effect on the Beast, the only magical help I had was one swallow potion and one blizzard potion. And yes, there should be a way to save (perhaps just an autosave) after the cutscene. I don't think I have seen anyone arguing otherwise, only that the fight isn't as impossible as some try to make it sound.

Lady Dragonfly wrote:I would also like to say a thing or two about so-called "dialogue options". It boils down to yes/no, basically. Nothing else in between. Are you bastard with us or against us? -I am against you bastards. - Then you bastard die. - No, you bastards die.

I really don't mind the fact that Geralt does the filler talk automatically when the game leaves the player with the dialog choices that actually matter and influence anything. And about the yes/no/neutrality thing, that's the whole point, you're forced by the extremes to take sides and since there is almost never any actual "good" side the choice can be difficult. I've spent minutes at a time just staring/playing guitar while trying to figure out what would be the most fitting choice for the kind of character I'm trying to play - unlike most (*cough*Bioware*cough*) RPGs where you just choose the goody-two-shoes response of the evil-jerk one.

Lady Dragonfly wrote: And what if you don't have aard developed enough? And most of your potions and blade-enhancement stuff are with the dead inkeeper?

That's called choices and consequences. You got a recipe which allowed you to make an oil that would be necessary to fight the beast. It was made clear through a lot of clues that the beast is after you and that there will be a confrontation. And what are you doing? Leaving all the necessary stuff at the inn and running around unprepared. Don't complain if you are shot after bringing a knife to a gunfight.

Honestly, what would be the alternative? The Oblivion approach:
<End of Cut-Scene>
"You sense danger, you smell the beast. It's waiting for you just a couple of steps ahead. You need the "blabla"-oil to defeat it, smear it on your blade - no, not the axe, the steel witcher blade, yes, that one. Oh, you don't have the oil? But you got the recipe, didn't you? And we told you the beast is after you, right? Ahh, you left it at the inn, for whatever reason. Alright, head back to the dead innkeeper, he'll rise from the dead just to give you your stuff back. Go now, and be quick. The beast won't wait forever. Or no, actually it will. But don't forget to use all your potions before entering combat! And buff your Aard skill, it will make the combat much easier!! And save! And tie your shoelace!"

Just for the record, I killed the beast on my second attempt on hard.

And save! And tie your shoelace!

Oh, please. This game tells you exactly what to do next. It is all in the journal. Go there, talk to such and such. Check over there. Find them (marked on the map, btw). Everybody hated that in Oblivion and suddenly the same people love it in The Wither. Give me a break.

That's called choices and consequences.

No, it does not. I hope not. If that is what The Witcher's designers really call "choices and consequences", then I am done with this game for good. But I suspect you misrepresent their idea of choices and consequences, so I keep playing.

Don't complain if you are shot after bringing a knife to a gunfight.

Did I say that I personally kept all my stuff with the innkeeper? Or tried to keep the witch alive? Or any of that? Please read what I said before attacking my "stupidity". We are talking about the game design and an average player’s concerns; why some diehard fans and tough guys feel necessary to stomp out critical comments of a casual gamer such as myself, is beyond me.
I just looked up the official forum and found out that many people have the same headache:

The Beast

Lady Dragonfly wrote:Oh, please. This game tells you exactly what to do next. It is all in the journal. Go there, talk to such and such. Check over there. Find them (marked on the map, btw). Everybody hated that in Oblivion and suddenly the same people love it in The Wither. Give me a break. <snip>

Well, at least there is no instant-teleportation, no level scaling, no popup telling you to equip which sword, use which style etc. So perhaps there is more to the comparison then that.

And actually, you choosing to leave specific items with the innkeeper is a choice you make. It is not a game-flaw. You can say that perhaps it is a game-flaw to not allow you to carry everything you found, but well, that is not correct either - that is a game design, like it is that NwN2 lets you carry immens amounts of inventory, Witcher lets you carry less.

And yes, the beast can be difficult, but he is not impossible, and you do not need Aard to finish him, but you might need potions (if you do not have Aard) which is also said when you choose difficulty, that if you choose medium, alchemy is useful, and hard, that alchemy is needed.
That however means there is more then one way to win/fight.

Lady Dragonfly wrote:Oh, please. This game tells you exactly what to do next. It is all in the journal. Go there, talk to such and such. Check over there. Find them (marked on the map, btw). Everybody hated that in Oblivion and suddenly the same people love it in The Wither. Give me a break.

From a Witcher quest I'm currently on: "I gave the mirror to the noonwraith. She stopped attacking me and seems to remember who she used to be. It wasn't enough to put her to rest, though. I need to investigate further. Aren't there any shortcuts to this folktale? I must continue looking for a way to put [the ghost] to rest."

The level of hand holding isn't even close to that of Oblivion's since, in The Witcher, the quest log generally (Or never? Can't remember.) doesn't tell you information you haven't been told in-game while such occurrences are rampant in Oblivion.

Also, the map markers only show you where (and if) you have been told to look for someone, if an NPC is not there you need to use your wits and think about where you might find someone at the time of day you're trying to find him/her. Apparently, some have actually reported this as a bug.

@Xandax

Well, at least there is no instant-teleportation, no level scaling, no popup telling you to equip which sword, use which style etc. So perhaps there is more to the comparison then that.

Why do you need to compare this game to Oblivion at all? Is it a sort of a benchmark? Does it automatically make one game a masterpiece because another one is bad (in your opinion)? I did not play enough, of course, to express the final opinion (and I don't have much spare time, unfortunately, with my busy schedule). So far I am unimpressed, but you and Buck say that one has to play through at least two chapters to really appreciate the game. I trust your opinion, so I will play, and I really want this game turn out a worthy one, eventually, because I was counting days and hours before its release. My husband was making fun of me, but he went to Best Buy during his lunch break to buy this game for me on the first day it was released in the US.

I understand that game design can be different. And our preferences are different. We both know that a lot of people think Fable was the best RPG ever. Or Diablo. Or Oblivion. But what makes my preference better than somebody else's? These are just different games aimed at different gamers. you don't have to buy or play them.

The Witcher is a long-anticipated game. I could not care less about "mature" themes. The "sex" does not bother me (btw, can you review the hard-earned cards? ). The "mature" themes don't make a game mature.
I care for a good story, dialogues, NPC interaction and mystery. I care for stuff fable mentioned in the other thread. I don't care for pretty in-game movies. I don't hate them, I just don't care for them. And that is why I am a bit disappointed. Why do you need to play for 20 hours before you begin to appreciate a game? Why are the dialogue trees so poor? No, I don't expect a drunk speak like Professor Higgins, but I expect more sense and purpose. Why is the game so linear? See, I like the open-world feel. I like to roam and explore and yes, get ambushed, and not to be goaded along a narrow path with invisible fence, even if the guidance is not blatantly obvious. That is just my personal preference though.

And why are my critical comments treated as ludicrous? Yesterday GB news posted a link to a positive review containing a grain of salt:

The game does have some issues, though, including a few crashing problems. It crashed once after zoning (and prepare for zone/load times when you enter and exit buildings) and once when exiting the game.

Some of the other smaller issues with the game include the repetitiveness in the conversations and how – sometimes – the conversations seem to make little sense. Also, when you get to the first boss battle, you may not succeed initially, and failing means having to repeat the cut scene that precedes the battle. This is a bit of a pain.

Lady Dragonfly wrote:@Xandax


Why do you need to compare this game to Oblivion at all? Is it a sort of a benchmark?<snip>

I don't - you did.

Lady Dragonfly wrote:<snip>Why do you need to play for 20 hours before you begin to appreciate a game?

"You" don't, well you perhaps do, but not everybody - it is fine you dislike the game, sure - go ahead it is your prerogative. That is not the point others, and I, was trying to make.
You berated the game's inventory system because you left critical items in storage instead of lugging them with you, and claimed it was poor design,when in fact it was poor inventory management.
That was the point. And for the matter, I played for less then 1 hour before I appreciated the story and thus the game.
Perhaps I was just out looking for something new and fresh then the traditionally run-of-the-mill no surprise and no consequence stories, but this one really stood out to me.

Lady Dragonfly wrote:<snip>
Why is the game so linear? See, I like the open-world feel. I like to roam and explore and yes, get ambushed, and not to be goaded along a narrow path with invisible fence, even if the guidance is not blatantly obvious. That is just my personal preference though.<snip>

Indeed, and then the Witcher was never a game for you. It is a story driven game, not a free-roaming game, I don't think I ever saw a mention that it was free-roaming.
It is made to follow the story, not the story follow you, so in that aspect it is more like NwN-series/KOTOR-series then Oblivion (and no, I'm not using Oblivion as any benchmark, but an example of a type).

As I said - there is no problem with the fact that you - or others - dislike the game, we all dislike some games.
But when you bring out points, you should surely expect counter points, especially when the points are not a subjective preference, such as your points about the inventory flawed design.

I don't by far mean this game is perfect, the long load time is an issue (although not one which bothers me much), difficulty in controling camera, and some chopped dialogue.
But to me the story is the best I've seen for many years and many of the quests were very well done - and I also liked how it was not "kiddie" in the fact that the world is grim and not polished; the way alchemy is combined with gameplay was good. Combat was interesting enough and simple enough that I did not grow tired of it as I often do in other games and so on...
To me - The Witcher is a quality game from an all but unknown developer - and surpasses many established development hourses attempts at RPGs.

Monolith wrote:
Just for the record, I killed the beast on my second attempt on hard.

:laugh: Took me about eight goes! I had to load a previous save in the end so I could get to a campfire and make the Spectre Oil for my sword. After I had that it was pretty simple and won the first time. Everyone's style is different so it's difficult to say oh it's easy to kill a certain monster and it only took me so many goes etc. Not everyone plays the same, some people reactions are different as well as strategies. I heard several people say they could kill the best in their first go without any help in the from of potions or oils. I personally can't see how that is possible after my many attempts without the spectre oil but it must be possible as people have done it. The fact is not everyone gets the same results.

So I'm sympathetic to Lady Dragonfly's comments as it is very annoying to have to reload after dying and go through the same cutscene. Takes ages! It would have been better if the autosave had come into effect after the cut scene. At the same time after looking over a few of the posts you've made on this thread I agree with a lot of what you're saying too. No one is completely right or wrong it all depends on your experience with the game

Xandax wrote:

Indeed, and then the Witcher was never a game for you. It is a story driven game, not a free-roaming game, I don't think I ever saw a mention that it was free-roaming.
It is made to follow the story, not the story follow you, so in that aspect it is more like NwN-series/KOTOR-series then Oblivion (and no, I'm not using Oblivion as any benchmark, but an example of a type).

As I said - there is no problem with the fact that you - or others - dislike the game, we all dislike some games.
But when you bring out points, you should surely expect counter points, especially when the points are not a subjective preference, such as your points about the inventory flawed design.

I don't by far mean this game is perfect, the long load time is an issue (although not one which bothers me much), difficulty in controling camera, and some chopped dialogue.
But to me the story is the best I've seen for many years and many of the quests were very well done - and I also liked how it was not "kiddie" in the fact that the world is grim and not polished; the way alchemy is combined with gameplay was good. Combat was interesting enough and simple enough that I did not grow tired of it as I often do in other games and so on...
To me - The Witcher is a quality game from an all but unknown developer - and surpasses many established development hourses attempts at RPGs.

My thoughts exactly. People who like the Oblivion style totally non linear experience (I do myself), but can't take any other sort of game style wouldn't enjoy this game. I like both styles for different reasons. I've always been a fan of the Elder Scrolls games and love the non linear gameplay but most people would agree that with it's open endedness it's difficult to make a gripping storyline. Most RPG's will stick to a linear storyline and in a game like The Witcher this is the correct way to go. The storyline is gripping and immersive. It all depends on the game. You can't really compare the game styles as they are on completely different ends of the spectrum.

Well, you could have paused after the scene and saved it there.

Xandax wrote:Well, you could have paused after the scene and saved it there.

Good point actually I hadn't thought of that DUH :laugh:As I say I ended up going back to a previous save because I needed to have access to a campfire to mix my spectre oil and couldn't do that after the autosave which was just before the combat situation with the Beast.

That is one advantage of the game using so many save slots. It's easier to go back a notch without having to keep control with the saves yourself

In my opinion it is a flaw that there is no autosave before a chapter boss and after long cutscenes. But I don't think it ruins the whole game. I mean hopefully you have saved the game sometime when you were storming the salamandra hideout I have played this game like 50 hours this week and I can't see whats 10 lost minutes (real time) to go to a campfire?

My first play through I lost because I panicked and I admit it was even on easy. So I coated my blade in spectre oil drank a swallow and tawny owl and won. A second problem is that the beast only appears at midnight and your preps can wear off. I'm not sure if mine did but I noticed that on harder difficulty. Its not gamebreaking but it does detract from the realism of the game. I don't mind having to reload now and again but I like to have the feeling that my character has some clue that tells him the beast will attack. I mean I didn't walk around the entire chapter 1 with spectre oil on my blade So it didn't make sense.

I would have been happier if after the dialogue with the townsfolk Alvin started spoke in the beasts tongue and challenged the witcher saying 'I come for you' Then there would be a howl or something and you would be drinking coating and things (Edit: but no pop ups haha) and then the houses would burst in fire with a cutscene (after about 20 seconds to prep/save say your prayers).

Edit: I wonder if there could be a patch (or mod) to add an autosave

The game actually makes many auto-saves. Try going into your load-save game list, and I believe they are marked as (autosave).
The game saves in different slots constantly, when quick and auto-saving, so you'll have a large list of saves to go back to without needing to control it yourself.

Claudius wrote:In my opinion it is a flaw that there is no autosave before a chapter boss and after long cutscenes.

My game autosaved before the chapter boss. The Beast is the first boss and my game autosaved many times before meeting it. Admittedly it autosaves before the cinematic so unless you save after the cinematic (when you go into combat) then you have to go through the cinematic again but the game definately autosaved before then a I was using the autosave to load several times.