The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Review
-
Category: ReviewsHits: 35040
Article Index
Page 5 of 6
Quest Design and Choice & Consequence So far, I've described a game that is primarily an action RPG, though story-driven and with solid crafting and character development. And while you do spend quite a lot of time in combat, I wouldn't necessarily say it's the game's main draw. Instead, I'd say that on top of a good setting and solid story, the game offers a rich set of quests with a variety in designs, and all but the most minor quests (of the type (beat the best dice poker players)) can be approached in different ways and/or offer different choices to make during the quest.
A number of side quests deal with issues and conflicts within the towns you're in and thus do not have violent solutions. Instead, you are offered different options on mediating, deciding in favor of one of the two sides, or using one of the dialog skills (Axii sign, persuasion or intimidation) to resolve the situation. One of the best examples is in the Scoia'tael path of Act II, where a prince is accused of poisoning the beloved leader of the rebellion. Geralt is tasked with resolving this heated situation, and he has to hurry as the peasants are set to riot. And when this game tells you to hurry it means it, albeit in an odd way as the (you must decide now) event is triggered by how many people you talked to rather than how long you took about it. Regardless, this is a quest that tasks you with talking to the various people present right there, but you can also try to reach the prince to question him, or follow one of various clues offered to you. One bit of knowledge is actually only available if you resolved another quest earlier. And in the end, Geralt sums up what you've discovered while talking to the nobles and peasants. The player must then decide what he believes happened based on what you've learned, a choice that in turn impacts other main quests. The information you gather can offer a fairly complete picture, but the game is pretty ambiguous about the guilt of the prince, so it's a tough decision to make.
It's all about choices offered and the consequences they have. Most of them are minor, for instance opting not to take a dive in a fistfight means a few goons are sent to teach you a lesson. The main choice is between siding with the leader of the slain king's special agents, Vernon Roche, or one of the leaders of the Scoia'tael, an elf named Iorveth. This choice is offered in Act I, and siding with either one locks you in for the rest of the game.
Two things really impressed me here. One, the choice is significant, Act II plays out completely differently based on who you sided with, as you play most of the act in Vergen for the Socia'tael path or in the Kaedweni army camp with Vernon Roche. While in both cases your main task is to lift the curse laid on the land, all the sidequests are different, and it only two of the tasks in the main quest are the same. While you do get to visit the other side, a lot of areas are shut off for Geralt at the enemy's map, and sidequests are certainly not available. Act III is also impacted but only in its main quests, not in the sidequests. Secondly, on my first playthrough I got the impression that Vernon Roche was clearly the good guy while Iorveth simply a terrorist. And while it turned out I was correct and Iorveth remains a pretty extreme character, the path you follow with him is not an insane, evil path where you are forced to side with a clearly evil side. Instead, you find yourself in a rebellion that may be manned by extremists like Iorveth, but has the highest and noblest ideals. In fact, the path he took me to lead to more favorable results than following Vernon Roche, which has unfortunate consequences. To put it shortly, what impressed me was that neither option was clearly good, nor did they lead to where they can be expected to go.
Obviously, this is the biggest consequences get in the game, as it's the main choice you're asked to make. It does mean this is a game that warrants at least two playthroughs, which is exactly what makes choice & consequence mechanics so wonderful in RPG games. And it's not just that you get to explore different areas, CD Projekt is not afraid of putting certain facts concerning the main plot in only one of two paths. Much of what motivates Henselt is only available in Roche's path, and only in that path can you decide how to deal with him. On the other hand, a key and very surprising fact about one of the main characters is only available in Iorveth's path, and at best vaguely hinted at in the other path. Without wanting to sound too preachy, this is a delightful counter to the industry trend where developers worry about gamers not seeing every bit of their great game, and force them into linear path and cutscene expositions. CD Projekt gets the value of C&C, and offers a game that's great the first time you play it through, but offers a dollop of extra value on the second time.
