CD Projekt defends Witcher 2 difficulty

By Fred Dutton Published 24 May, 2011

Plus, promises "huge" patch due soon.

While The Witcher 2 landed in stores last week to almost universal acclaim a number of users, and reviewers, raised concerns about the RPG's brutal learning curve.

Developer CD Projekt's response? Deal with it.

In Eurogamer's 9/10 review of the game last week, Quintin Smith complained that the game was "ungodly tough" at the start before becoming more manageable later on.

"Obviously we have been inspired by hardcore games, by difficult games, and maybe that might be the reason why it was not that obvious to us," answered senior producer Tomasz Gop.

"But we didn't want the game to be a piece of cake at the beginning like, you know, an interactive movie. That wasn't what we were aiming for. We definitely wanted to introduce at least some level of difficulty.

"I think the most common misunderstanding is that most people compare our 'normal difficulty' to other games' 'normal difficulty'," he continued.

"Since we are a hardcore game, we do require a hardcore approach on the 'normal' skill. The 'easy' skill is basically for the guys who want to take it light.

Gop also answered one other complaint that some users have had: glitches. He explained that the development is working hard on a "huge" patch which it hopes will be available in the next few days.

"Definitely, we are aiming toward this week," he said. "I don't know if it's going to happen today or tomorrow but we will release a full changelog so everybody knows what's going to be addressed and knows what's coming.

"It's going to be a huge one and we've taken this last week really seriously and we're trying to fix if not all then most of the important things. It will definitely satisfy a huge number of gamers who are angry out there."

Aside from these few niggles, Gop said that the team is very pleased with how the game has been received.

"We'd like to see more reviews because we've been working for four years and it's only a week now [since release] so we're still waiting and craving for anybody and everybody to let us know what they think. But the ones we have seen so far are really good.

"There are better and worse reviews but still, the average score is totally positive. We did not expect the game to be flawless but it's over 90% and that's great.

"There are reviews that are really, really low but we take down notes and write down everything that is bad or criticism. We never whine or complain to any of the editors or actually anywhere outside [the studio]. If it's a really unfair review – because these things happen – we still try to take out anything that's constructive."

As detailed earlier today, Gop also revealed that CD Projekt is getting ready to announce a new Witcher title at E3 next month.

Picture of Fred.

About Fred Dutton

Fred Dutton is Eurogamer's US news editor, based in Washington DC.

Read more articles from Fred by visiting the Fred Dutton archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (82) Latest comment 9 months ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • randompanda #1 9 months ago

    Why would they need to apologise for making a difficult game?

  • Eraysor #2 9 months ago

    My complaint with the difficulty is that on Normal the combat simply isn't that fun at the start. You just roll around endlessly while reapplying the protective spell, occasionally poking an enemy with the sword before instantly rolling away again. That's the only way I could survive before I put it down to easy and it became a lot more fun.

    I do hope that patch fixes the crashes though. The game likes to simply cut out instantly on me sometimes. The longest I've gone without a crash is just over an hour.

  • Haloboy #3 9 months ago

    The memory leak needs fixing asap. Apart from that I've next to no complaints. Love it.

  • Darren #4 9 months ago

    @Eraysor - After 30 hours of playing this game I've yet to experience a single crash or bug; guess I must be lucky! :p

    I have confess to finding Normal difficulty tough at times and have dropped down to Easy when needed to avoid frustration so it's nice that you can do that at any time just by pausing the game and accessing Gameplay options. Personally I think there should be an extra difficulty between Easy and Normal as that would be perfect for me. Still, regardless of the wavering difficulty, this game is simply awesome in spite of the flaws such as weird doors, no delete/overwrite save option and a lack of full-screen 16:10 resolution support and the patches can only make it better.

    I *HEART* CD Projekt RED. :D

  • orren #5 9 months ago

    "Developer CD Projekt's response? Deal with it."

    I applaud them for that. There are very few titles that are challenging nowadays. I miss the unforgiving difficulty of the games i used to play in the 90's :)

  • astagg #6 9 months ago

    I did find the first few combats hard however I think was more down to not really know how the combat worked, all seemed to be alot better once I got the hang of it. As for crashes have not seen any, my only issue is the limited position you seem to have to be in to loot an object.

  • the_dudefather #7 9 months ago

    so far the most difficult part of the game has been the very first fight, since then I've been ok

    Having to look at a manual was a nice blast to the past though!

  • Darren #8 9 months ago

    @randompanda - Go read the god-awful Destructoid review in which the reviewer exaggerates small issues as if they're gamebreakers and complains about the difficulty and lack of hand-holding during quests (god forbid you should have to read the Journal and books to gather intel). He gave the game 6/10, a score which is at odds with every other professional review. I guess when the developers see reviews like that then they feel they need to apologise! Stupid really, it's difficult to please everyone admittedly but I find it refreshing to play an RPG that doesn't insult my intelligence.

  • wizlon #9 9 months ago

    First off, I haven't played The Witcher 2, I'm sure it's a fine game.

    But.... I can't stand games that are unnecerraly hard with stupid difficulty spikes, if you want to make a hard game then add in more difficulty levels, or make hard the default difficulty, don't expect all your players to be hardcore fans with ninja like reflexes, it just ruins gamees for the rest of us.

  • hiddenranbir #10 9 months ago

    The difficulty is a call back to how RPGs used to be, the typical CRPG and I am loving it. Of course, I'm still not sure I want to try insanity....

    @wiz

    People can always select "easy".
    Edited by 1 at 24/05/11 @ 21:35

  • Scopeh #11 9 months ago

    Good for them, theres too much of this spoon feeding crap going on with games. Learn to be a gamer or GTFO.

  • Bravestinsane #12 9 months ago

    @Darren

    other than shit optimising... my computer cant run it with a 4870X2, on the lowest settings, so i play on high, any setting gives about 25fps thats all, been told its my CPU, but a core 2 duo at 2.83 shouldnt be a problem either so i donno.

    The only bug i have come across so far is that i couldn't finish the quest where the trader is drugging the locals in Fotsom just gave me a black screen and stuck there.

    Other than that im really enjoying it, and the difficulty is a null issue, i struggled on the kaylen but then watched youtube vid,was a little weird how i had to use the environment, even though i hadn't had to up till then. Only fight i have genually been stuck on is the second boss, i just switched to easy after 2 hours of trying then back to hard when i beat him. I am perfectly happy with the difficulty to be honest, they have no reason to apologise, but the reviewer on destructoid should apologise a lot more.

  • ricpamiwor #13 9 months ago

    I love it, the difficulty is tough but not impossible. This is just a reaction from the dumbed down console crowd who are just use to crosshairs and driving games.

    Well done CD Projekt, I salute you!

  • Anciegher #14 9 months ago

    I wonder when we will get the news of the first complete playthrough on insanity? :D

  • Apaar #15 9 months ago

    I absolutely love that the game doesn't hold my hand or constantly guide me around. It expects me to able to read, and to possess a brain. Reminds me of Demon's Souls in that regard. The destructoid review was indeed laughable, and I hope the CD Project team wastes no time worrying about such petty rubbish.

  • Vagrant #16 9 months ago

    Witcher 2 difficult? Ok maybe i will find a challenge on insane, still havent tried it, but on hard it simply ranges from ok to easy, only one truly hard fight is a completely optional boss in CH3.

    Yet people whine after 5 minutes spent with the game...sad and ridiculous what the 'gaming world' has become...

  • Paul_cz #17 9 months ago

    Love their approach.

    Please guys at CDP, do not take any heed to dtoid review.

  • SvennoJ #18 9 months ago

    Is the clunky movement part of the difficulty we just have to deal with?
    At least you can set combat to easy when you're tired of rolling around. It does get easier after a while though, you just don't have many options at the start. Having played the first one probably helps too. I had no idea what aard, igni, quen etc were for at the start.

  • Kostabi #19 9 months ago

    I really like how CD Projekt go about their business.

    Witcher 2 is a tough cookie but it's not unfair. It's just a proper RPG in letting you work out for yourself what the solution is instead of painting giant neon signs over everything... makes a refreshing change.

  • panathatube #20 9 months ago

    I think it is an incredible game, but let's face it, normal mode in Witcher 1 was, normal, in Witcher 2 is difficult. I read somewhere that the designers were influenced by Demon Souls which was really difficult and boy was that a bad influence or what! It's not an impossible game though, and i can say that knowing that i am not an uberplayer, but when witcher faces 5 elves he is certainly in trouble, he feels a bit like a common fighter not like a kick a***s witcher. He is easilly flanked and then adios amigos game over! Also there is not really a tutorial, the player starts off having Geralt in the thick of the action. Having said that, the gamer can always change the difficulty level, i like the battle system, and their constructive attitude towards criticism.
    Edited by 1 at 24/05/11 @ 22:04

  • infernox1 #21 9 months ago

    @bravestinsane

    i think thats more to do with drivers since you have a dual gpu card. thats 1 of the problems with them.

  • laurentiuman #22 9 months ago

    I can't believe some people complained about the difficulty. I found normal to be quite easy. I don't think I died more than twice the entire game to normal enemies...and on bosses about 3-4 times max each boss fight. I even found a shit reviewer that down rated the game because it was too difficult for him. I guess that if you have the intelligence of a pineapple then yes this game is difficult.
    Seems that a lot of people haven't played 90's games. Everybody got used to fable and dragon age 2.
    Edited by 1 at 24/05/11 @ 22:20

  • Inmediasress #23 9 months ago

    Yeah no need to apologize it's not CD Projects fault that people became used to the mass effect kind of interactive movie with childs play combat difficulty or other games that don't really feel games anymore.
    They feel more like hollywood productions at best with extreme hand holding it's the other developers' fault for making games "mainstream" so that you can play it while rolling your face over the keyboard.
    I always wondered why people cried like little babies about the Gothic and Risen games combat which was hard and unforgiving (asides from Gothic 3 which I admit was flawed) at least to those that like to sleep and paly games at the same time.

    Oh on a side not destructoid always bashes games randomly.
    I think they play russian rulette with reviews, sometimes they get spot on but most of the time they just simply bash games.
    Edited by 1 at 24/05/11 @ 22:35

  • ronuds #24 9 months ago

    Too many devs having to "defend" their choices these days. Gamers are such a bunch of whiny complainers.

    Game's too easy! Game's too hard! Wah, wah, wah, I need a ba, ba!

  • Rack #25 9 months ago

    If your normal difficulty is out of synch with everyone elses then that's a flaw,you aren't adequately setting expectations. If you can't change that difficulty mid-game then that's another flaw. And if there isn't an easy mode that is actually easy then that's yet another flaw.

  • FanBoysSuck #26 9 months ago

    @Bravestinsane

    The Witcher website states it as a known issue, hopefully it'll get sorted soon via a driver update/patch. It always sucks when those who buy a high end card run into problems, especially when the advise is to remove the second card (I'm guessing you don't fancy sawing your 4870 x2 in half).

    I'm more annoyed about the witcher 1 being unplayable atm due to the registration server being down (I've got v1 collectors edition). At least when they get that sorted and I've clocked the first one the second one will be patched up and good to go.

    /stares at Wii box sized collectors edition in the corner still sealed up :'(

    Edit: Ah the Destructoid review is by Jim "goes against the general consensus for the sake of it" Sterling.

    Watch his videos on the escapist. It's like a visual interpretation of nails down as chalkboard.
    Edited by 1 at 24/05/11 @ 22:45

  • webcider #27 9 months ago

    Alright the game killed me like over a 200 times already i might feel i am quite stupid when i hear some people only dying twice however i have to say i learned very late actually it was in Chapter 2 i first realised what vigor means and also i learned to use throwing and potions after the tutorial it was very challenging for me not using the swallow potions in the prologue i am sure i could beat the Prologue without dying one single time now because i learned the game fully now. But yeah it did took a very long time to master it. But no criticism more games need to do this make a epic start and make it hard so people know what type of game they are going to be playing. Also this tutorial / prologue is probable one of the best beginnings to a game its like right into action mindblowing graphics and cool dragons. Awesome awesome i can't wait to replay it :D
    Edited by 1 at 24/05/11 @ 22:44

  • paulf #28 9 months ago

    manic miner tough?

  • misho8723 #29 9 months ago

    Every one has his own opinion, but the review from Destructoid isn't professional or anything. Why is a PC RPG game reviewed from somobody who doesn't like PC or RPG games? That's like when i get a racing sim game to review and i gave the game a bad review just because i like arcade racing games.. am not complaining for just that somebody has another view on a game, but because it drive away people from the game who would otherwise like it ..and for the company CD Projekt... for a game that is for me, a perfect example that a PC or console game can be considered an ART
    Edited by 1 at 24/05/11 @ 22:47

  • Bravestinsane #30 9 months ago

    @FanBoysSuck

    ahh ok thanks, at least they know thats the main thing, im waiting for the new ATI drivers anyway, should have a fix for this and brink in 10.5b drivers fingers crossed lol

  • davisorle #31 9 months ago

    Too much of a spoiled generation of gamers. Please devs stop responding to those complaining about difficult games. Thats why we loved the first Ninja Gaiden, thats why we love your game and thats why we loved only the initial year or two World of Warcraft that has now turned into a playground for kids, non skilled tards and people with an online wallet to be chanching genres, servers and names of their chars that lvl instantly with an online purchased mount x.x

    As this might sound stupid its about million times worse living the experience as a gamer and nothing else. Real gamers than dont care about what console/rig and publisher you work for will always respect your work when they see that your work is based on passion about what you are making and not just for the profit and who might say something negative about it. Take as examples Crysis and Dragon age that listened to those bitching online... Not much more to say. Point proved I hope.

  • JoeBlade #32 9 months ago

    Truth be told, even the (W/C)RPG veteran I am was taken aback by the difficulty at first although in retrospect I feel that's mostly due to needless pandering of other games in thre genre in recent years.
    But I definitely disagree with the statement that Witcher 2 is unfairly hard. Challenging, sure, but in a true-blooded RPG way, which is exactly what I expect from a game of this kind :)

    So as far as I'm concerned: keep it up, CD Projekt Red!

  • geox30 #33 9 months ago

    At last we are given a game that feels real,is challenging-not difficult and rewarding.I haven't had that feeling of love for a game since I don't know when!

  • Azilis #34 9 months ago

    The start of the game came as no surprise to me . . . the original game's tutorial was no cakewalk either. That said, I don't have a problem with them throwing you right into the thick of things with no difficulty curve. I set the game to Hard at the start, and while I had to reload more often that I ever have in a tutorial, it was never frustrating. There was generally a reason for any game over that was correctable the next time through.

    Maybe the problem is that those initial stages are not really a tutorial. Yeah, they have descriptions of various abilities pop up on screen to help out, but those stages are basically just the start of the game -- not intended to be an introductory lesson on game mechanics.

    It helps immensely to be completely familiar with the usefulness of the magical signs from the first game (not just the protective one). I can understand being frustrated if you're diving right in without having played through the original Witcher. The sequel doesn't incrementally introduce new abilities like the first one did.
    Edited by 1 at 25/05/11 @ 01:12

  • jumpdeveraux #35 9 months ago

    Just bought this and selected the dragon conversation tree at the very start. What followed was 15 minutes of me going "WTF" as I got burned to death in under 60 seconds. The "tutorial" windows that popped up just gave me advice on swords attacks and parries. The NPCs were directly in the flame but none of them caught fire or screamed.

    I'm all for difficult games (loved Demon Souls) but this was a particularly brutish start for a new player to the Witcher 2 with the game offering no visual cues or tips as to the fire (I tired hiding behind walls, was looking for water to put myself out). I understand if you select other options in that conversation tree you get an easier lead into the game (I never played Witcher 1).

    That said, looking forward to the rest of the game, reviews have been excellent.

  • neems #36 9 months ago

    @jumpdeveraux -

    Yeah, I think those dialogue options allow you to skip parts of the prologue, presumably for a second play through. Depending on how far you've gone it might be worth going from the start again.

  • Laminator #37 9 months ago

    I played through the game on hard and found the difficulty about perfect. Admittedly the start was tough but I understand why they did it now - to show you you can't just hack at things with your sword, you have to use all your abilities. Overall there was no fight I couldn't beat once I learned how to play - sure I died plenty but from my own mistakes usually. It actually made me think for a change, stark contrast to say Mass Effect 2 where the hardest level was no challenge at all. Absolutely loved the game refreshing breath of fresh air to old school gamers like me. I'd have rated it 9.5 would be 10 if not for some minor but annoying flaws with the UI and inventory system.

  • NegativeZero #38 9 months ago

    I'm less worried about the difficulty and more about the fact that the game won't launch at all unless I manually change my desktop resolution down to 1920x1080 and set the game to that as well. I want to run at native resolution :(

  • SClaw #39 9 months ago

    Difficulty is perfect. I don't like to be punished, but Normal feels fair if you use all the tools you are given.

    Please fix the doors. Right now those are my only issue with an otherwise perfect game.

  • apoc_reg #40 9 months ago

    Love the approach to unfair criticism (I'm looking at you destructoid, knuckle head Jim), also normal should have a challenge!

    Keep it up Project Red

  • R74NN #41 9 months ago

    @neems: I thought the same. But on my second playthrough when I tried it I had to experience all parts of the prologue again. So there is no way how to skip it at the moment.

    Edit: Well, there is a way, you can load previous game from the point you want and continue from there. You can also change difficulty level on the fly.
    Edited by 1 at 25/05/11 @ 06:51

  • WizenWolfBain #42 9 months ago

    I honestly don't know who in their right mind would complain about this game being "too difficult". It is so refreshing to finally have a game that requires a little effort and thought. I was getting bored with Fable type RPGs, in which you could run into a group of 20 bandits and cast spell after spell or just button bash away with your sword. BORING. I'm willing to bet those comments came from a lazy reviewer who couldn't be bothered to put the time and effort in to actually playing the game.

    It took me around 8 attempts at the first 10 minutes of the game. But that made it feel so much more rewarding when i finally realized that you have to be tactical and dodge/block/cast spells all at the right time. I miss truly difficult games like Ninja Gaiden and TW2.

  • InvisibleCrane #43 9 months ago

    So just because a game is easy then it automatically sucks?...yeah that's a stupid thing to think I say

  • Tyronne #44 9 months ago

    I have but one problem with the witcher 2 and it is one which has stopped me from playing it within 5 minutes of starting it up and that is the tiny font they have used ingame. I play all my pc games now on my big telly and sitting a good 6 feet away from the screen makes the text unreadable. Now I know this in my own personnal playing style but surely the option to increase the text size must have come up during play testing? I am hopeful that this has been rectified in the new patch and if not then I shall have to wait until it is in any further updates.

  • Megalodon #45 9 months ago

    This is 'The Emperor's New Clothes' tale all over again: the game is brutally hard and unfriendly to all but the most 'hardcore' (the so-called 'wise men' of our tale that refuse to see that the emperor has no clothes), extremely clunky interface, bugs aplenty (I loaded a saved game, and suddenly all my weapons disappeared! And my previous savegame before that was before a very tough battle), it has annoying voice-overs (especially the book-selling dwarf), it hardly has any optimization and cannot run on many mid-range computers and gaming laptops that should be able to run it without a hitch even on the lowest graphical settings and even the graphics have a lot of clipping and AA issues.

    The game is not a 9. Period. I'm really sick of this industry and all you yes-men that refuse to see issues on a game that has them by the truckload, but point out every little thing on a game you deem as too 'watered-down' or not RPG-enough. You guys just suck, you and those damn reviewers that have to agree with you because they fear your 'wrath' in the form of millions of angry comments and insults.

  • davisorle #46 9 months ago

    @Megalodon
    Its "gamers" like you that devs listen to often enough to ruin their IPs as I mentioned before. You have bugs? report them like the rest that DO care about their games and wait for things to be patched. Your PC cant handle the game? Its not their fault. Upgrade or go play with your console. I dont see why all the hate and anger tarwards the rest of us nor the devs. If you were right about it in the slightest then Crytek should have been executed a long time ago.

  • midnight_walker #47 9 months ago

    Megalodon said:

    Wah wah, game too hard! :'(

  • WizenWolfBain #48 9 months ago

    @Megalodon

    If your PC can't run this game on low/medium settings, that's your problem. I have a sub £600 medium end PC with a 3 year old ATI 4870 graphics card and a core i5, and i can run this game at 1920x1080 at medium/high settings perfectly. I'm sick of people moaning for developers to make PC exclusive games more accessible to the lowest common denominator. New games would never advance graphically or in scale if developers kept making games that people could run on laptops and low end PCs. It's time for PCs to break free from their dated console counterparts and embrace new technologies that consoles cannot. If you're looking for a more reasonable solution, why don't you consider a standardized console such as an Xbox 360? Apparently there could be a Witcher announcement at E3 this year.

    AND

    I've been playing this game for around 6 hours, and the only "glitchy" issue I've encountered is the occasional bit of screen tear and a slight issue picking items up from the ground.
    Edited by 1 at 25/05/11 @ 09:00

  • PlugMonkey #49 9 months ago

    Rack
    "If your normal difficulty is out of synch with everyone elses then that's a flaw,"

    Why is that a flaw? Game developers set out to create a certain gameplay experience. They set the difficulty level at whatever they feel delivers that desired experience and then they call that "normal".

    What else are they supposed to do? What other measure is there? There is no universal standard of "everyone else". Should they check every game ever made? But what if then you, their audience, hasn't played every game ever made, and you've played a lot more Spongebob Squarepants than Ninja Gaiden? Then they're still going to be "out of synch".

    The developers make the game. You only play the game. They decide what sort of game they make. You only decide if you like it. And if you don't, but enough other people do, then they aren't going to give four fifths of a flying funk.

    Can you imagine the homogenised piles of lowest common denominator crap we would be served up year in, year out if every developer in the world decided the most important thing in the world was to be "in synch" with everyone else?

    No. No saying "Well, everyone else makes their RPGs this hard, so I guess we'd better...". All you can do as a developer is say "We think RPGs should be like THIS!".

    And that, as they say, is that.

  • vonschwarzen #50 9 months ago

    This is my first post here so I apologize in advance .

    First off, I like the difficulty DON'T CHANGE IT. I like that you should read the manual ......

    I purchased 2 copies of the game , 1 for the wife, and the other for me, neither of the 2 pc's are cutting edge .
    I found that the witcher 2 likes a 4 core cpu.
    The auto settings were as such :
    quad core q6600 with 8800 gt = high
    core 2 duo 3.0 gHz with gtx 275 = low
    I moved the quad over to the pc with the gtx 275 and bought new parts for an upgrade :)

    My only complaint is the lack of mouse speed,acceleration etc customize settings.

  • Clive_Dunn #51 9 months ago

    It's nowhere near as hard as The Beast pre-patch in the first game, now that was a massive difficulty spike.

    Finished chapter one, nothing has struck me as unfair so far. It's just a tough game. At least you can save this unlike Demons Souls.

  • subedii #52 9 months ago

    The ironic thing is that I think a fair few of the complaints about how difficult it is might have actually been reconciled by playing on hard.

    I'm pretty much as far from an expert gamer as you can get. I sucked at Arkham Asylum when I started it, and I sucked at DMC when I started it, but I eventually learned how they played. And yeah, going hard difficulty (because I'd heard of the difficulty dip later on) I died plenty of times on the early fights. But the crucial thing is:

    1) I was still having fun with the combat

    2) I was forced to actually learn the combat system

    The second point is crucial. Because instead of simply wading in, slashing away, hoping for that one time in 20 where the enemies and my strikes align just so to allow me to proceed by chance, I had to learn what the combat system was about. DON'T let yourself get hit, roll, use signs, use bombs and potions, even the playing field. The Witcher isn't Superman, and four guys can STILL take him down easily. The point is that he's a professional and simply more skilled. It's his expertise and tools that allow him to survive such encounters.

    Think of the combat in terms of Arkham Asylum. If you're letting yourself get hit a lot, you're doing it wrong. In general it didn't take me long to get used to the combat because I had to learn the essentials just to survive. If you're simply charging headfirst into battles and hoping to mash your way out, well, that's not going to happen.

    Or else you really can set the game to easy. Like the devs said, there's no shame in that if that's what you're looking for, but easy mode should be the easy mode, not the default mode. If you're still complaining about the game being too difficult but you haven't put the difficulty down to something you're comfortable with, then yeah, I can't say I see that as a valid complaint.

  • gregski #53 9 months ago

    Ohnoes, this-game-is-too-hard whiners are crawling out...

    If you ever get to read the books that The Witcher is based on, you will know that the witcher job - apart from his supernatural powers and skills - is all about preparation, tactics and using everything on your disposal to succeed in combat. How many times we had games where we were given plenty of different stuff to use against enemies, but actually never used it because of that epically-ultra-rare sword that made us only yawn between clicking the mouse and waiting for the combat to end?

    This is a first game that actually makes me use swords,magic,traps, bombs, blocks and what not ALL AT ONCE. It makes me really care about crafting new cool weapons as soon as possible, cause I know that they are going to make a difference. And I can't just run in a bunch of guys, bash my mouse button and in the meatime check if my dinner is ready. I have to think, plan and after good preparation show some SKILL. Thank god that word is brought back by the Witcher series, last time I heard it in gaming was in the Quake 3 Arena times.

    Oh, and the game also brings back the meaning of the game manual - now that's refreshing, I feel young again! Pity that all the new-school-emo-hipster "gamers" don't know that it's actually there for some reason.

  • Vypour #54 9 months ago

    I have no complaints about the game difficulty. It makes sense. The game forces you to use ALL your character abilities and creativity. Btw, the less tutorials the better. I hate being spoon fed - forced through frustrating "click here, click there's".

    That being said; I played The Witcher 1 so...the prologue wasn't that much of a baptism of flame for me. Awesome game :-)

  • anomagnus #55 9 months ago

    I made a quick post before about the combat in the witcher (negged in to oblivion of course, as you cannot, CANNOT criticize the witcher). It’s not that its difficult, its how uneven the combat is, how inconsistent it is. I can face off against a dozen Nekkers, and make short work of them. Endrega queens – no problem. Golems, gargoyles, bullvores and wraiths, just stains on my sword.

    3 bandits, wearing no armour, one with a cross bow? Suddenly I’m on my ass. What the fuck? I’m sorry guys, but if I slash a guy on the chest, who’s wearing no armour, he’s down. Yet I have to beath the fuck out of these guys, all the while, their pilfered weapons are making mince meat out of my new, carefully crafted armour.

    The combat makes no sense. Don’t even get me started on the Malena quest, one of the largest difficulty spikes I’ve ever seen. 6 duel wielding elves? I got so frustrated by playing the game the way it was meant to be played, I just gave up, and spammed grapeshot bombs until they died. Fun? NO… I console myself with saying the most dangerous monster of all is Man, but that’s a sop, and combat against humans and elves is painfully annoying.

    Of course, all this becomes moot when you upgrade Quen to level 2, and then combat becomes a piss of piece. But that still brings me back to inconsistent combat.

    As for all you superior game players who bragging about difficulty, and how games should only be for the super skilled such as yourself, you might want to consider that gamers don’t tend to play games they can’t enjoy. A AAA title coming in at 5 in the charts isn’t a good place to be, and I suspect the only way CDProjket can make it work, is that their development costs are far lower than they might be in the UK or the US. But that’s not sustainable. If the Witcher brand is to grow, it needs to understand that its current ethos won’t work for mass appeal. When the wticher launches on console, expect changes.

    As for technical flaws, I’ve been lucky enough, no real problems. One single crash, running at 1920x1080 with all effects on highest, with blur switched off (made me queasy for some reason). This is, without a doubt, the FINEST looking game I have played all year. The Crysis and Unreal engines, IMO are in trouble, for this game ran like a dream.

    I don’t think this game is as good as some people are raving about (which to me, seems to be more about reacting to the so called dilution of Bioware, than an actual love of the game), but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a good game. The VO needs work. Like combat, it is mixed. Vernon Roche is amazing, one of the best VO jobs I’ve ever heard. Triss is SHOCKING. Some of the worst VO I ever heard. Geralts work isn’t powerful. Too stilted, no emotion, I can’t make my mind up if its just sloppy work, or someone trying to hard to be the cool, quiet tough guy. Combat, is a mixed bag, and unlike the first game, its very narrow, very linear. I don’t mind that, but people are talking about an epic, open world game. Its not. You do make a major choice in chapter 1, that changes the course of the game, but the two paths are both very straight.

    Its an 8, that when its good is a 9, but, can drag itself lower from sloppy combat.

  • gingerjumper #56 9 months ago

    Anyone having trouble with it running on 4870x2 (only using 1 of them not using 2 in crossfire) should see this link http://ww w.quartertothree.com/game-talk/... Ive changed my settings as described and it runs flawlessly now :) Btw Witcher 2 is an amazing game, so cinematic and fabulously rich. Bravo CD Projekt!

  • arcam #57 9 months ago

    As for all you superior game players who bragging about difficulty, and how games should only be for the super skilled such as yourself, you might want to consider that gamers don’t tend to play games they can’t enjoy. A AAA title coming in at 5 in the charts isn’t a good place to be, and I suspect the only way CDProjket can make it work, is that their development costs are far lower than they might be in the UK or the US. But that’s not sustainable. If the Witcher brand is to grow, it needs to understand that its current ethos won’t work for mass appeal. When the wticher launches on console, expect changes.

    I think you're misunderstanding the praise being given to it. I really don't care if the game has mass appeal or not. For once I am pleased that the developers are making design decisions based on what will be best for the game, not simply what is preferred by the largest number of people.

    You seem to be suggesting if they don't do this they will go out of business, but I really don't think that's the case. They've done what's right for their audience, and the game is much better for it. And on their chosen platform, they'll be rewarded with higher scores, more respect, and better sales than the biggest, most famous studios.

    If this was an EA console game with a $50m marketing budget I might agree with you, that not catering for the mass market is a risky move. But it's not, and it's all the better for it.

  • subedii #58 9 months ago

    As for all you superior game players who bragging about difficulty, and how games should only be for the super skilled such as yourself, you might want to consider that gamers don’t tend to play games they can’t enjoy. A AAA title coming in at 5 in the charts isn’t a good place to be, and I suspect the only way CDProjket can make it work, is that their development costs are far lower than they might be in the UK or the US. But that’s not sustainable. If the Witcher brand is to grow, it needs to understand that its current ethos won’t work for mass appeal. When the wticher launches on console, expect changes.

    There's a few points in your post I disagree with (most specifically that humans should be easy opponents), but I wanted to address this one specifically.

    NOBODY is saying you're supposed to be super-skilled to play the game. But if you're finding it difficult and can't be bothered to learn the mechanics, turn it down to easy. There's no excuse not to.

    An ordinary game entering into the charts at 5 is still good, and you're just plain wrong if you think that's somehow a bad thing. That said, even then, The Witcher 2 is NOT an ordinary game. The game entered in at 5 in the UK charts, DESPITE being a single platform title, and this is completely ignoring DD sales. I'd say that's an impressive achievement, and that by all accounts the games doing really well for itself (even went beyond their pre-order expectations).

    I don't understand what you mean by "Mass Appeal" here. If it means going the route of simplifying the game, then no, that's precisely the thing that defines it and it shouldn't be lost. If it means making the game easier for the console market, then honestly, I don't doubt that "console gamers" can happily adapt to its gameplay model just as well as anyone else can.

    They know the style of gameplay they're going for, and that's what their fans want, and that's what they've developed. Watering it down in a misguided attempt to appease the masses just results in stuff like Dragon Age 2, which last I heard had sold about 1 million across three platforms.

    [link url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/re ad/9.274668-Dragon-Age-2-Sales
    ]http://ww w.escapistmagazine.com/forums/r...[/link]

    Now the Witcher 1 exceeded those numbers purely by word of mouth (however I will grant a much longer time period, but DA2 has pretty massive negative word-of-mouth working against it now), and by all accounts, Witcher 2 is selling even better than the first game did. And is still at the moment a single platform title.

    Perhaps you should consider this: It's not deliberate streamlining and watering down to meet the phantom of"mass appeal" that will get Witcher 2 its sales numbers. It's being focussed on the style of game it wants to be, catering to that core audience, and getting spread as a result because it's a quality game.

    I mean you can pretty much throw that argument against Starcraft 2. Oh noes, it's built with its fanbase in mind, no concessions made in chasing the "mainstream"! It didn't do all the things the other RTS's do! Doesn't matter. It's still an exceptionally well developed game. And because it knew what it was aiming for, it's probably currently the number 1 competition game in the world right now. The League scene is pretty much insane.

    If this kind of whining results in massive gameplay changes for the console release, then it's the console gamers I feel sorry for.
    Edited by 2 at 25/05/11 @ 11:16

  • aarlev #59 9 months ago

    Don't change the difficulty please. It's so refreshing to finally play a game which is challenging and doesn't hold your hand the whole way through. I had to change the difficulty to easy in some fights during the prologue, but that's just because I wasn't very good at the game yet. Now I find normal just perfect. I still die a lot, but that's what makes it fun and more rewarding when you then finally win a battle.

    I think The Witcher 2 is the best game I've played in my life. Not since Baldurs Gate 2 have I been this engrossed in a game. I love you CD Projekt Red!

  • arcam #60 9 months ago

    The trouble is that many publishers have convinced gamers that if you want a AAA game, it has to cost many hundreds of millions of dollars, that a single platform (let alone the PC platform!) is not viable, that DLC packs and restricted second hand sales are necessary to recoup the cost of developing for a HD platform.

    The Witcher 2 blows all that out of the water. They've released a huge game with amazing graphics, fully-voiced characters and more varied content and environments than 90% of AAA blockbusters. And they've sold it for £30 on a platform dismissed as unworkable by other developers.

    When CD Projekt can achieve a huge epic like this on a 'dying' platform and still make money, you have to wonder why, even with the huge audiences and extra revenue opportunities on modern consoles, people insist that the huge budgets and penny-pinching tactics of modern games are unavoidable.

  • geeza2020 #61 9 months ago

    Well I'm a 360 owner, hoping and praying for the Witcher 2 to come the consoles. I'm also hoping and praying that they change as little as possible, especially the difficulty. I'm sick of being treated like an idiot by devs on consoles, so hopefully CD Projekt will keep the difficulty where it is and not listen to all these people who dont seem to realise there is an "Easy" option for people raised on a diet of Mass Effect and other stream-lined casual RPG's.

  • anomagnus #62 9 months ago

    @arcam
    I'm not questioning the praise on the difficulty, I’m questioning the tones of some of the posts on this forum, regarding how other people tackle the game. If you can't spot a superiority complex in some of those posts, you're being willfully blind.

    I'm also not seeming to suggest they will go out of business, i am outright stating it. Development costs go up. All the time. As much as you'd like to believe otherwise, there will come a point when a smaller audience will not be enough to support a game hitting at 5. You also need to consider that CD Projket may be the developer, buts its Namco that publishes it, and they're going to have a cost base as well.

    @subedi
    I believe no figures. You have that link, i have this one

    [link url=http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13533 ]http://ww w.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthrea...[/link]

    That’s says over 2 million units sold, according to an SEC filing. HULIQ predicts over 4.5 million units over the DA2 lifetime. Do i know if either of them are right? Edited - SEC will be obliged to audit that, so i certinaly beleive those figures over a forum post from the escapist.

    As for mass appeal, i mean accessible. The witcher wasn't accessible. I have quite a few gamer mates, and they'd get fucked off with the witcher. Not because they're less skilled, or uninterested in stories, but simply because the game would be impenetrable for them. If they play games, how do you expect someone that doesn’t play games, but who might appreciate a good story to manage with the Witcher. Not being able to make a deep game that is also accessible is not a virtue, its a failing.

    As for Starcraft 2, I’d never use that as an example, due to the nature of the Korean fanbase. I’m not saying discount it, but if we exclude the Korean aspect, how well would Starcraft perform?

    In particular subedi, your tone suggests that you are one of these gamers that feels threatened by ‘mass appeal’. Apparently any criticism of the game is whining. I’ve stated that I’m making my way through the game, and that problem lies with difficulty consistency.
    Edited by 2 at 25/05/11 @ 11:51

  • subedii #63 9 months ago

    And yet, Dragon Age: Origins actually sold around 3.2 million if EA is to be believed. DA2 may yet reach that number, but frankly, sales have dropped off massively compared to the first game and that's not really looking likely. Certainly well short of the 4.5 million units they've predicted.

    As for mass appeal, i mean accessible. The witcher wasn't accessible. I have quite a few gamer mates, and they'd get fucked off with the witcher. Not because they're less skilled, or uninterested in stories, but simply because the game would be impenetrable for them. If they play games, how do you expect someone that doesn’t play games, but who might appreciate a good story to manage with the Witcher. Not being able to make a deep game that is also accessible is not a virtue, its a failing.

    And here again, I'm having a hard time understanding just what you mean by "accessible". If it's just an issue of difficulty, like I said, the difficulty can be turned down. I saw similar complaints about Devil May Cry (all of them), but turning down the difficulty by default just negates the gameplay altogether.

    As for Starcraft 2, you're dismissing Korea for some, well, bizarre reason. Seriously, let's talk about The Witcher 2's sales but exclude Poland where the books are from. Or STALKER but ignore Ukraine and other countries in that region. You wouldn't talk about Mass Effect's global sales and then say "but ignore the country where it has the most appeal".

    OK, let's do that anyway. Now look up how well the global Starcraft Leagues are doing, and things like the collegiate league. I mean crikey, these days Day[9] is actually now known about well outside of Starcraft circles.

    In particular subedi, your tone suggests that you are one of these gamers that feels threatened by ‘mass appeal’. Apparently any criticism of the game is whining. I’ve stated that I’m making my way through the game, and that problem lies with difficulty consistency.

    Difficulty consistency I can agree with. Saying it's TOO difficult, or cheap, or whatever, I can't. And no, I'm not particularly threatened by mass appeal, but the way you're defining it is vague and only leads me to see you as wanting to remove the challenge from medium difficulty. Your comment was complaining about how those "bragging" "super skilled" players don't find the game difficult, and I'm saying, I'm not skilled at all. But I got the hang of the combat. And your post only amplified that impression when you went off on a tangent about how you should be beating human opponents into a pulp because of some vague theory of common sense that you're trying to apply to the combat gameplay. Which you really shouldn't be bothering with, because the combat gameplay in any game is always going to be built around what's most fun.

    In general, I have yet to see why dropping the difficulty level when playing The Witcher 2 is somehow not an applicable solution to the complaint of "too difficult". For most of everything else surrounding the game, I feel it's pretty much accessible enough as is. There are flaws (what game doesn't have them?), like tooltips flashing by too fast in the wrong circumstances, but aside from that, I haven't found the game any more difficult to get into than a game like Fallout 3. And that performed exceptionally well on consoles.
    Edited by 1 at 25/05/11 @ 12:49

  • arcam #64 9 months ago

    Even if it isn't accessible or doesn't have mass appeal, I don't see why that's a problem.

    I no one was buying the game because of that then there would be a problem, but instead they've taken what you see as a disadvantage and used it as a unique selling point. And judging by the praise the game is getting, it's working. So again, what's the problem? That your mates don't like it? Not everyone can like everything.

  • subedii #65 9 months ago

    If anything, CDP should be applauded for making a game when 'normal' difficulty actually requires you to work on achieving victory in combat.

    Too many games nowadays mistake 'normal' for 'braindead'.

    Yeah I remember playing Dead Space for the first time on Normal. Didn't die, like at all. I think I could could the total number of deaths on that playthrough on just one hand. And really, something like that affects the atmosphere if you're in a horror game and you're not actually feeling threatened by anything.

    Now it's widely accepted by most of its fans (and I'm a huge, huge fan of Dead Space) that "Hard" is the best way to play Dead Space on a first playthrough. I'm not going to criticise Visceral necessarily for making the default mode easy enough to walk through. But at the same time, come the sequel, I bumped up the difficulty right from the start, and it made a real difference.

  • Rack #66 9 months ago

    @Plugmonkey.

    Really, you act as though it's remotely difficult to tell if the difficulty of Witcher 2 is way beyond that of every other RPG made in the last 20 years. It's not, it's perfectly clear they've made something much harder than everything else and they've failed miserably at communicating that information. All they have to do is relabel "normal" as "hard" and relabel "easy" as "normal". They really really should add an easy option on top of that with doubled health and damage for people who genuinely can't handle a challenge, it's not like it would take more than a day or two of effort.

    If they want to make something different then add a "very hard" option, add a "damn near impossible, seriously unless you're a masochist don't even try it" option. But don't just call "hard" "normal" that's just terrible design.

    And as for everyone here, if you like hard games then for goodness sake play on hard, that's what it's there for. Don't doggedly stick to normal and then complain games are too easy. And if you're already playing on hard the issue isn't that games are getting too easy it's that there aren't enough difficulty options. Which, when it comes round to it is exactly the flaw Witcher 2 has.

  • anomagnus #67 9 months ago

    @subedii

    Its too early to tell what DA2’s life time sales will be. EA predicted 4.5 million units for its lifetime. That may happen, it may not. But I’d prepared to wait a year before making a judgement. It wouldn’t hurt for others to do the same. In my original post, I made a point about an anti bioware sentiment, and the almost pathological need to see DA2 fail is a symptom of that. Personally speaking, I don’t see 4.5 million sales happening, but I never would see that in a fantasy themed RPG anyway.

    When I say accessible, I mean in its literal sense. Would any gamer, not just an RPG fan, pick this game up and enjoy it? My guy answer, and of course its opinion, is that no, they wouldn’t. The combat, in particular, does not lend itself well to wide appeal. The inconsistency is off putting to say the least. Within the confines of the games system, it doesn’t make any sense. How can it be harder to kill a guy with no shirt on, than a gargoyle with stone skin? How can I crush a golem, but fight for my life against peasant bandits? Turning difficulty up and down in game, to handle particular fights, again, in my opinion, that reeks of poor design. When you select a difficult it should be consistent. The amount of damage required to kill an unarmoured human, is the exact same as is required to kill a stone skinned beast. That’s not me going off on a tangent.

    I’ve never been stopped by any fight in the game, I alter my tactics as I see fit, but just spamming grapeshot for the easy kill, that’s not fun. But nor is it fun rolling all over the ground, running away, slashing a bit here, slashing a bit there to grind down six elves. It also doesn’t make any sense as a follow on from the first witcher. By the end of the first witcher, I could handle large groups of humans, but by the start of the witcher 2, geralt couldn’t?

    Further to that, CD Project said they are happy with the game being hard, and not being an interactive movie. But by close to the end of the second act, with a good portion of my talents in my swordsman tree, and level 2 quen with the armor dethmold gave me, combat then came out the other side. Now it’s a foregone conclusion. There is no consistency in any of the witchers combat. All the reviews say it, that it gets hard at the beginning, and then easier. Why would that be the case? Its not a hardcore game at the end game. My point is, a lot of gamers aren’t prepared to wait until the end of act 2 to enjoy a game. That’s not a negative reflection on them, though I am sure there are many on this board that will be quick to label them as lazy console gamers.

    I’m not sure where you saw me saying the game is too difficult. I’ve stated multiple times, its inconsistent, in a very bad way. Inconsistent enough to limit its audience. I want the witcher to have a large audience, yet apparently wanting it to have a large audience is a bad thing, because , oh no, console gamers will be there…

    The game is flawed, but as I said, its an 8, that can reach a 9, and with a patch could be a permanent 9. But nor is it the gaming perfection that some people are raving about.

    As for starcraft, literally, until you mentioned Day [9], I’d never heard about them. Starcraft e games aren’t that big a deal just yet, where people outside the scene will have common knowledge about them. The reason I brought in Korea, is that its warping the figures. There’s no way you’re going to tell me that Starcraft 2 is as big in the rest of the world as it is in Korea, and if that market suddenly wasn’t there, do you really think it would have the same footprint? Would it have been as successful? Without that fan base, would Blizzard have been forced to alter their game? Yes these are hypotheticals, but they need to be considered.

  • subedii #68 9 months ago

    Like I said, inconsistent combat difficulty, I can understand as a complaint, too difficult, I can't. And all your complaints about "accessibility" still seem to centre on it being too difficult for new players and nothing else. I don't understand how you can say difficult is not your complaint and then in the same post you talk about having to wait until the second act to "enjoy the game" because the game's too difficult up to that point. Those two points don't really gel. For that matter:

    Inconsistent enough to limit its audience. I want the witcher to have a large audience, yet apparently wanting it to have a large audience is a bad thing, because , oh no, console gamers will be there…

    Oh deary me, perhaps YOU could tell ME where I said anything even remotely along those lines, because I certainly don't remember it. Because what I very directly REMEMBER saying is that "console gamers", like "PC Gamers" will happily adapt without too much issue.

    Why would any non-RPG fan pick this up? Why would they pick up Fallout 3? Because like I said, they both seem about as accessible in terms of their mechanics. Witcher moreso I'd say, because it actually has characters that look and animate well, and has better voice acting. The gameplay mechanics for things like potion making and crafting seem fairly intuitive. And plot and dialogue choices aren't any more mechanically difficult to make than in a game like Fallout 3, neither is movements or general control. The only thing I'm seeing you complain about is the combat, and we've gone over that.

    As for starcraft, literally, until you mentioned Day [9], I’d never heard about them. Starcraft e games aren’t that big a deal just yet, where people outside the scene will have common knowledge about them. The reason I brought in Korea, is that its warping the figures. There’s no way you’re going to tell me that Starcraft 2 is as big in the rest of the world as it is in Korea, and if that market suddenly wasn’t there, do you really think it would have the same footprint? Would it have been as successful? Without that fan base, would Blizzard have been forced to alter their game? Yes these are hypotheticals, but they need to be considered.

    And again, this is a completely bizarre argument. Korea skews the results? How? Because it's most popular there?

    Again, The Witcher 2 (like the first game) is likely to sell VASTLY disproportionately in Poland, where the books are from. Every iteration of STALKER sold (incidentally, another million seller franchise) sold vastly disproportionately in Ukraine, Russia, and bordering countries.

    And the Witcher 2, aside from being a well developed RPG, is clearly also targeted at its native market Poland and mainland EU. That's also one of the key reasons that it was a PC led release: console gaming hasn't really taken off in Poland , at least not to the extent that PC gaming currently exists there. If we removed Korea then Starcraft wouldn't be nearly as big? Fine. If we remove the UK market, Harry Potter would have never made it to mass appeal either. And if we removed Poland, Witcher 2 would never have been made. At all.

    Inarguably tailoring games to their respective markets means they will sell more there. This is a good thing. And apparently, such appeal isn't exclusive to JUST those territories, because people like something new and different, and that's why such titles have had a chance to succeed outside of their territories. Be that as it may, like I said, a game like the Witcher 2 does not seem to be so hopelessly niche designed that it loses its appeal elsewhere. Mechanically (and outside of the combat issues we've been focussing on here) it seems no less accessible than other games that have preceded it in Western markets and done well.
    Edited by 3 at 25/05/11 @ 14:32

  • ghiest #69 9 months ago

    I actually liked the difficulty, after the first deaths I was thinking to myself ... damn it's nice to see something challenging after all the drivel I've played in the last 2 or so years. Definitely my GOTY so far.

  • PlugMonkey #70 9 months ago

    @ Rack

    Then I load it up, I play it on normal, and I think I'm playing the experience as the designers intended, when I'm not. Which is utterly, utterly wrong.

    Isn't it?

    It's not up to them to tailor their experience to you, or what the market trend has been for the last 20 years. They think that RPGs were better when they were tough, so they made a tough RPG and set that as the 'default' difficulty level.

    They do that for no other reason than that is how they think their game should be played.

    What better reason could there be?

    Should they change the way they suggest people play their game just because you can waltz through Fable and Fallout with your eyes closed? Why should they compromise their vision like that? If you don't like it, you can put it on easy, or don't play it at all. Why should the developers be the ones to compromise on what is the best way to play a game that they have made?

  • anomagnus #71 9 months ago

    @subedii

    You seem obsessed with using similes which aren’t appropriate. About the only thing harry potter has in connection with the witcher is they’re electronic mediums. Its not a great way to illustrate your point. The star craft connection was loose enough, but its getting ridiculous now

    I’ve wasted enough time on this. The game remains inconsistent, and inaccessible. If they wish to chase niche gaming, that is and always has been their prerogative, but in my opinion, its an unsustainable business model, unless they’re prepared to raise the price of games.

    I’ll finish the game, enjoy the story, and maybe come back when cd project make the combat enjoyable. Whatever your opinion will be, we’ll see more games in the view of DA2, than we will of the witcher. In my opinion, it’s a better gaming world for it.

  • Sevens #72 9 months ago

    Just stay the way you are, CD Project. Don't become like EA and Bioware with their excessive pre-order, retailer-specific, cross-promotion, at-launch and post-launch DLC. It sucks and giving it stupid names (Cerberus Network, Signature Edition) and claiming that this stuff rewards "loyal" fans is ridiculous. Much like DA II's environments.

    Edit:

    Oh and not to forget, making games "accessible" and going for the "broader audience" tends to be a really bad idea (Fable 2 and 3, DA II, and probably ME 3).
    Edited by 2 at 25/05/11 @ 17:01

  • subedii #73 9 months ago

    @ anomagnus:

    I wasn't using similes, I was giving examples from different games and industries. For that matter, you pretty much ignored the parallel cases of the first game, and the Stalker series as well, which since you're so adamant about it, ARE from the same industry. And so far neither of the companies involved has gone under, and both are in the process of putting games out console-side. Be that as it may, you keep banging on about how "inaccessible" the game is, but outside of what's basically the early combat jump we going over, you haven't given me anything to tell me what aspects of the game are supposed to make it so inaccessible to a console audience. No matter how many times I've asked.

    "In your opinion" CD Projekt is an unsustainable business model without any real elucidation as to why other than vague hemming and hawing over inaccessibility.

    In my opinion I've tried to get at what the heck you mean by this and you've never been able to answer that question, and I've already illustrated how in comparison with other RPG's like Fallout 3, The Witcher 2 doesn't come out as being inaccessible. You see because I remember the same freaking song and dance about how either Fallout 3 was going to be dumb as a brick "for the console market", or it was simply going to be "inaccessible, for the console market". And heck, Fallout 3 was fairly buggy to boot (and New Vegas even more-so). Yet for some reason, it was still a success console side, when for all the talk of inaccessibility it shouldn't have been.

    The only point of reference you have ever given for this is constant complaining about the combat, which is easily resolved by placing the game difficulty down if you're having so much trouble with it. I''m not now nor have I ever said the combat is perfectly balanced in the game as it progresses. However, I don't see its base difficulty as being the company destroying accessibility issue you seem to be making it out to be.

    So whatever. Feel free to castigate the game for its inaccessibility all you want. When you can give me those points that you're constant referring to but never actually elucidating on, then go ahead.

  • anomagnus #74 9 months ago

    [link url=http://www.penny-arcade. com/
    ]http://www.penny-arcade. com/
    [/link]

    A nice article, with a comic, that will in jest, pretty much sums up the problem

  • Rack #75 9 months ago

    Thing is, it's not really valid to complain "RPGs are too easy" because if you find on the whole the normal difficulty is too easy you only have to select hard and you're fine. As long as there's a decent spread of difficulty settings that are adequately explained then there's no problem. But when developers start saying things like "People don't understand that our normal is different to everyone elses normal" then that's a problem. Because how ARE people supposed to know this? If on the difficulty screen it said.

    Easy - Equivalent to normal/hard of everyone elses game.
    Normal - Brutally difficult, expect to die dozens of times in the tutorial.
    Hard - For truly skilled players and/or masochists only.

    Then they could reasonably complain that players didn't understand what their "normal" meant. As it stands if players in general don't understand something about the game then that's the game designers fault.

    As for your idea that normal means "recommended" I find that quite puzzling, how are game designers supposed to know what you like and how skilled you are in order to make a recommendation? And if you do treat games this way how long do you play Dragon Age 2 or Fallout on normal before cranking up the difficulty? If a team genuinely did want to make a recommendation wouldn't it be better to have difficulties such as?

    Normal - Most players should get through this with few problems.
    Hard - Even skilled players should expect to die often. This is the mode we feel Witcher 2 should be played at.
    Very Hard - A true challenge for the most expert players

  • silversun #76 9 months ago

    i set 2nd game to easy because i not bothered about the combat side of the game i just want enjoy it and the other parts of the game are what make it great.
    seems fairly smooth gameplay on easy so if people finding it hard i think you can change to easy while playing , i dont care either way.
    Edited by 1 at 25/05/11 @ 19:46

  • PlugMonkey #77 9 months ago

    "As for your idea that normal means "recommended" I find that quite puzzling, how are game designers supposed to know what you like and how skilled you are in order to make a recommendation?"

    As I've already said twice to no avail, but here we go again anyway:

    You think they can't make a recommendation about how their own game that they have made should be played, but they can adhere to some mythical mean difficulty value? One which varies, to use your own words, according to "what you like and how skilled you are". And what's more, and this is where this starts to border on offensive, you think they should adhere to that regardless of whether they think it is the best thing for THEIR game?.

    It's not about what YOU like or what YOUR skill level is, it's about THEIR game and how THEY think it should be played. Do you see? Can you see that? THat's all they can do. There is no other 'Normal', not least because my idea of 'Normal' differs wildly from your idea of 'Normal'. So who do they try and please? It's so mind blowingly simple: they please themselves. They make the game THEY want to make and set it up how THEY think it should be. And they hope some other people like it too. What you, I or Peter Molyneux think about this is of considerably less importance than what THEY think.

    All they can do is decide how they want their experience to be and balance to that. They can't balance it to anything else, because as you keep saying yourself, there is absolutely no way they can know how good you are, what games you've played and so what YOU consider the population mean difficulty level to be.

    The really aggravating thing about this is that in no other medium would the audience be expecting the creator to adhere to some sort of population average. You don't get this shit from people reading books or watching movies or listening to music, where the audience decides that their requirements supercede the creators vision, or that the experience they are trying to deliver should be required to conform to some sort of population norm.
    Edited by 1 at 26/05/11 @ 07:42

  • google_calasade #78 9 months ago

    It's not rocket science. Having trouble in the beginning on normal? Change it to easy, then up the difficulty level as you go when needed. Damn sissy whiners! LOL

  • AlistairUK #79 9 months ago

    I haven't seen anyone complain about difficulty - I've seen plenty of people complain about the difficulty of the tutorial... which is a bit different :)

  • Tuco #80 9 months ago

    Here's my egocentric theory about the game: I could figure out the combat system without problems and I'm not especially clever, so if you can't you must be stupid.

  • craziii #81 9 months ago

    the panda has spoken the truth!

  • uk_john #82 9 months ago

    What I don't like is they pour difficulty over difficulty, like the boss fights. The Kayran - no room to manoeuvre and mostly luck rather than skill. Letho, again, they force you to fight in a small room where there is no room to manouver, it's like they want the game to be difficult on top of difficult just so they can say it's an 80 hour game!

    I have spent an hour trying to beat Letho, and have never got more than 10% off his life bar! I will have to go way back and look for quests I have may have missed and go and kill loads of creature just to level up a couple more times. I have to do this because the game forces you to put at least 6 skill points in the "basic" skills that all other cRPG's give you free to start off!

    I might even just re-start the game on easy and enjoy the story, because I have heard easy makes the game a hack and slash with potions and such not needed!

    I will spend a couple days away from the game thinking about it, and I may well end up revoking the license so I can sell the damn game!