The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings - Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Tarcxy
- Start date
- Status
It's one of those rare games, which manages to convince you that you are a part of the fantasy world.
Seriously, the sense of immersion is crazy. The atmosphere is dark and brooding, and sometimes I'm apprehensive to follow up on certain quests. The game doesn't resort to cheap tricks to scare me in an instant, but the events linger on in my mind, and this is actually far worse.
I'm dreading having to meet some spectres at midnight, even though I know that when it comes down to it, I'll dispose of them quickly. The buildups and aftermaths of such situations are very well conceived.
I'm dreading having to meet some spectres at midnight, even though I know that when it comes down to it, I'll dispose of them quickly. The buildups and aftermaths of such situations are very well conceived.
^^ I think that is because it parallels the real-world in so many ways.
Everything on the surface looks shiny and in order and clean but scratch away that polish and all that remains is the dark below.
About Monster fighting, again unlike a lot of RPG's which are devoid of a well developed back-story that seems to reflect the central character's aura The Witcher has a strong base steeped in the character that is described in the books.
Unlike SKYRIM OR Mass Effect / Dragon Age II the character is more than just skin deep. I mean the dialogue choices for intimidation are direct hints of Geralt's past and to someone who has gone into the lore of the world amusing to say the least.
Like the Dmitry quest in Chapter 1 where you go to the Tavern and threaten his lackey with the persona of the 'Butcher of Blaviken'. And he immediately gets down from his condescending high-ground to an almost puppy like attitude.
Enjoy the game and keep an eye out for CD PROJECKT RED's next presentation CYBERPUNK 2077.
May your roads be straight and sword sharp, Witcher.
v.Na5h
Galvanizer
Finally finished witcher 1 ...
started playing it from sep12...
finished it yesterday...of course there was a three months gap in between...
the battle style was too erratic...
sometimes it was a piece of cake with the right combination...sometimes it was too difficult
act v was damn difficult...a total PITA
lost my cool with the spider(azar javed's) boss battle...
played with trainer there on..
F@#k you salaaaaamaaaandraaaa!!
started playing it from sep12...
finished it yesterday...of course there was a three months gap in between...
the battle style was too erratic...
sometimes it was a piece of cake with the right combination...sometimes it was too difficult
act v was damn difficult...a total PITA
lost my cool with the spider(azar javed's) boss battle...
played with trainer there on..
F@#k you salaaaaamaaaandraaaa!!
Now start with The Witcher 2 and don't forget to import save from the previous game.
Jasku
Herald
Guys, finally completed Roche's path, now to decide whether or not to do Iorveth's path. There are still a few unanswered questions?
I have a couple questions -
1) Do I play Witcher 1? Will it help me better understand the story line?
2) If yes, do I play it before or after Iorveth's path in Witcher 2
1) I dont believe I met Philippa Eilhart, only remember her from the last few missions of Flotsam, what happened to her?
2) What about Ves, no information there.
3) In the last closing scene we see a red army taking over the North, which clan is that? - Does this scene change based on my decisions?
4) I did not quite get Yennefer's role
5) The easy mode combat was too easy, beating Letho was a cake walk, just kept slashing, poor guy did not get a chance to respond.
2) What about Ves, no information there.
3) In the last closing scene we see a red army taking over the North, which clan is that? - Does this scene change based on my decisions?
4) I did not quite get Yennefer's role
5) The easy mode combat was too easy, beating Letho was a cake walk, just kept slashing, poor guy did not get a chance to respond.
I have a couple questions -
1) Do I play Witcher 1? Will it help me better understand the story line?
2) If yes, do I play it before or after Iorveth's path in Witcher 2
Dont have all the answers since I played this only when it released, but can answer a couple.
I have a couple questions -
1) Do I play Witcher 1? Will it help me better understand the story line?
Not much really. W1 would probably give you a better explanation on why Geralt lost his memory. Other than that, W1 is very good for making you understand Geralt's personal POV when it comes to dealing with things that go on in the world. Like whether to take sides or stay neutral and how your decisions cause unexpected results.
2) If yes, do I play it before or after Iorveth's path in Witcher 2
Play Iorveth first. Cause W1 is pretty big in itself. By the time you finish it, you would have forgotten details from your earlier W2 playthrough.
3) In the last closing scene we see a red army taking over the North, which clan is that? - Does this scene change based on my decisions?
I believe that is the Nilfgaard army and the start of the new war. I guess this was will be explained in W3. I played Iorveth's path and I got the same scene, so don't think it changes. I guess it was just supposed to be a setup for W3.
4) I did not quite get Yennefer's role
In W2, there isn't much of a role for Yennefer. Geralt is still looking to regain his memory and once he gets it back he remembers she was taken by the wild hunt. I guess, Letho in the end hints at where Yennefer is to be found. In W3, you will see her playing a more important role.
5) The easy mode combat was too easy, beating Letho was a cake walk, just kept slashing, poor guy did not get a chance to respond.
Yea by the end player becomes way too op unless you are playing in highest difficulty.
I believe that is the Nilfgaard army and the start of the new war. I guess this was will be explained in W3. I played Iorveth's path and I got the same scene, so don't think it changes. I guess it was just supposed to be a setup for W3.
4) I did not quite get Yennefer's role
In W2, there isn't much of a role for Yennefer. Geralt is still looking to regain his memory and once he gets it back he remembers she was taken by the wild hunt. I guess, Letho in the end hints at where Yennefer is to be found. In W3, you will see her playing a more important role.
5) The easy mode combat was too easy, beating Letho was a cake walk, just kept slashing, poor guy did not get a chance to respond.
Yea by the end player becomes way too op unless you are playing in highest difficulty.
I have a couple questions -
1) Do I play Witcher 1? Will it help me better understand the story line?
Not much really. W1 would probably give you a better explanation on why Geralt lost his memory. Other than that, W1 is very good for making you understand Geralt's personal POV when it comes to dealing with things that go on in the world. Like whether to take sides or stay neutral and how your decisions cause unexpected results.
2) If yes, do I play it before or after Iorveth's path in Witcher 2
Play Iorveth first. Cause W1 is pretty big in itself. By the time you finish it, you would have forgotten details from your earlier W2 playthrough.
Jasku
Herald
Thanks mate, have purchased the Witcherer directors cut and started off as well. Geralt looks gay and the combat system is *different* but oddly enjoyable.
How are you liking it? I tried playing it recently but couldn't take it. It just felt too cumbersome. When I played it when it first came out, I absolutely loved it and couldnt put it down. Now, I guess I just dont have the patience.
Jasku
Herald
Yes, exactly similar feeling, played a couple missions, currently on have to save Triss gather some herbs, I reached this point last week, but havent continued, last night I sifted through my TW2 saved games to play Iorveth's path!..
- Status