On taste, color, and comrades. An imperfect review of a perfect game

Now that we have waited for the first, substantial review of the perfect game, it’s time to share my opinion.

Geralt seems to hint...

I was also eagerly waiting for the second part of The Witcher. I was also excitedly examining packs of screenshots and listening to the enthusiastic responses from the press and everyone who got to experience the masterpiece before us. But upon receiving my collector's edition, I discovered that although it contained the "Best RPG of the year," it also harbored many unpleasant surprises.

Go to hell with your Crysis

So beautiful....

There are no complaints about the visual aspect; I would even say there cannot be any. Anyone who argues against this can burn in hell along with the fans of Crysis and other apostles of "cool graphics."

A true RPG player doesn’t often think about the graphical component while playing a proper RPG. Because if the RPG is truly "proper," they generally don’t care how anything is drawn.

Of course, visualization is crucial for creating atmosphere. But I've always forgiven graphical missteps in any game that presented a deep idea and content. Because in that case, my imagination easily filled in the gaps in the game's graphics.

Visually, The Witcher 2 is stunning. I don’t care how or on what engine this was made. It’s done well. So well that you can just walk around, look, and enjoy. You can take screenshots and frame them. You can print and sell wallpapers. You could even organize a small art exhibition.

To the visual beauty, the developers added a great world. A world that is alive, interesting, and amusing in places. It’s cool, really cool. It's a pity that the game isn't really about life in this world, but a bit about the Witcher, and the world serves as a backdrop; after admiring it for the first two sessions, you start to perceive it as something taken for granted.

Play the game, game to play

Run, Forest, run...

I have a lot to say about the gameplay. The main trend of The Witcher 2 is "For now we are a PC exclusive, but we really want to be on consoles."

Let’s go step by step.

Camera and controls

Once I regretted the beauty of the surrounding reality precisely when I saw the camera. Because such a camera is needed so that the player doesn’t have to zoom in and strain to see the beauty of the landscapes and other surrounding realities.

Technically, the camera is done superbly; it has, in my opinion, never taken an uncomfortable position in terms of view, never went behind my back where nothing is visible, and never got stuck in corridor walls. That’s good.

But when I play, I'm not overly concerned with technical perfection. Because if I try to pick up loot and there's a torch in the Witcher’s line of sight, I understand that "always burn the torch, my fate-a-a-a-a". I stumbled upon this twice already in the prologue. It was extremely irritating. No attempts to approach from another side were successful.

WASD is nice, it’s probably wonderful. But what for? What has it brought to the game? Has the game become better because of it? Are there any real premises for this?

No. This is again a consequence of beauty tied to the camera. I’ve always liked to choose whether I want to lean back in my chair and use only the mouse or if I want to use the keyboard. Why only WASD? Why can’t I click with the mouse? Sure, the camera doesn’t rise, but almost everywhere, that wouldn't hinder anything. And in battle, it would significantly simplify aiming.

I didn’t like the change in controls and camera. I didn’t gain anything useful from it, but I did see console ears sticking out from the corner.

Combat system

The first question that arose in my mind was rhetorical: "Why?"

In the first Witcher, the developers created a new and original combat system. It may not have appealed to everyone, it may have caused complaints. But it was something novel and quite interesting. It made the game even more exclusive, unbranded, and unusual. And of course, it made combat quite spectacular.

Why take a step back? Even if we’re stepping towards "classic" a la Gothic and so on? If you don’t want to keep the old, maintain the quality, and come up with something new; you’ve proven you can do it!

Okay, you decided to do it this way. Then do it humanly. Where is the target switching? How many times in the game, fighting against a crowd of enemies, will I find that the aim has locked onto an opponent who has fled behind the backs of their comrades? How many times will I lunge at swords, ignoring the obvious, in a futile attempt to hit someone that is not my priority target, but the computer still considers it so? The suggestion to "turn to a new enemy" using the control keys is absurd because when three or four enemies are on you, locking onto the desired target is nearly impossible (yes-yes, the Alt key, I know).

The clear weakness of the Witcher is amplified at least until level 9. I am sure some present will claim that they completed the courtyard shown in the screenshot above without running around in circles from enemies while they like fools run after you, taking your attacks one by one, or at worst - in pairs. But I want to see a video, at least on medium difficulty.

I will gladly listen to the advice of seasoned players and acknowledge my ineptitude, that I need to use Signs, and so on.

Mini-games and their ilk

Finish him with a dance...

The ideas themselves are interesting and deserve all praise. But the implementation, personally, did not appeal to me.

What I wanted from mini-games like boxing and arm wrestling? I wanted it to be easier to lose them compared to the first part. I don’t understand how it’s possible to lose them in this version.

What fundamentally distinguishes QTE from "rhythmic" boxing, where you also had to click the mouse at the right time? Nothing, except that you have to grab the keyboard, click two keys consecutively, and that it came from consoles. By the way, I'm not a console hater; I just don’t need a joystick emulator on PC.

I didn't manage to lose even once, and considering that you can practice boxing infinitely, I’ve racked up a ton of money already in the first chapter.

Roll the little apple across the plate The bones situation came out even worse. Everything is very beautiful, but personally for me - absolutely inconvenient. Throwing as the computer suggests seems intriguing - like you can spin it far. But I have a persistent impression that this was made specifically so that the bones could fly off the edge of the board. Because if you throw weakly - they hardly roll. Throw strongly - they fly beautifully away. Purely subjective impression; maybe it’s just not for me. And I didn’t like the view of the board from that angle. Neither fish nor fowl, in some way.

Alchemy and crafting

These alchemists have ground things down...

Even when Tomas Gop stated in one of the video interviews that they "simplified alchemy," I became sad. But he added that those "who will craft manually and not automatically will find something interesting," hope soared.

Upon starting to play, I sadly discovered the lack of additional properties for ingredients and sighed as I began to mix manually in search of revelation. So far, I haven’t found anything. If anyone has found something - enlighten me on what the trick is. Otherwise, I will be extremely disappointed.

Why do we need a blacksmith? We don’t need a blacksmith...

The crafting-related remaining ambiguities are connected. Throughout the world, we collect a bunch of useless junk. Moreover, in the absence of a chest, there is no place to store this junk. It’s impossible and senseless to turn this junk into something valuable. I haven’t seen any truly good items, and the cost of crafting does not allow you to earn anything with it. It remains to craft uniques, but why bring a ton of rubbish into the game - just craft uniques and that’s it? Explain to me what I didn’t understand and why this useless occupation was introduced into the world.

Character development.

I don’t have much to say. Well, they made the structure of the skill tree clearer. They clarified specializations more and removed the variety of combat while specifying the alchemical and magical aspects. Personally, this is more bad than good for me, but I don't want to assert this. Truly, to each their own.

Plot

"Everything will depend on the decisions you make!" says the inscription on the cover. But this is misleading. The fact that the developers made a double passage for the second chapter doesn’t mean that the decisions you make will seriously change anything in the world.

Understand me right; the plot is not perfect, but quite interesting. The quests are made with love; some are quite multi-layered and original in places. But the fact that the developers created not just one corridor, but several, which all essentially lead to one point and one ending - this is pseudo-choice, pseudo-diversity of endings, and pseudo-significance of your decisions.

Look for yourself, and you will see that your choice primarily affects the path of passage, not future events. Even where it seems to influence events - the ending will still be virtually identical. That is, the choice affects global changes in the game world, but feeling and experiencing its consequences almost impossible in the process of playing. That’s disappointing.

By creating an alternative second chapter, the developers effectively emphasized the single choice - Roach or Yorveth. I think this is a mistake. The emphasis of choice inadvertently shifted from morality to "it is more interesting to go through there" and "there you will get to X in a completely different way". This is easily seen when reading forums discussing the "non-linearity" of the new Witcher.

Dixi

All that has been said does not detract from The Witcher’s title as "RPG of the Year," and all other accolades that it receives.

The game turned out to be solid, beautiful, and interesting. It’s a pity it’s quite short. The developers really put in the effort, delivering a high-quality, completed product. By today’s standards - this is a Win.

Personally, I believe that engrossed in the engine, visual aspect, and game prospects on consoles (?), the creators became too technological and lost a lot of what was in the original project. They could not surpass the bar set by their own hands, but simply placed another one next to it, standing at nearly the same height but at a completely different angle.

For me - this is a fail.

The author admits that he may not have deeply understood the subject at hand and is eager to hear informative advice from other players in the comments.

Screenshots used in the post are taken from the site Kaer Morhen