Support NeoGAF

[obonicus]

...

I'll snip most of your response because it amounts to: 'I disagree'. Which is fine and your right, but doesn't make you correct (nor does it make you wrong).

The Witcher 2's combat system is relatively expansive and most abilities have their uses(thus it is not shallow).

This doesn't follow; what you gave isn't the definition of shallowness. Not being shallow implies a more elaborate meta-game, and I'm not seeing it -- all aforementioned uses are self-evident. At the same time, some strategies have few downsides besides being boring.

While it might not have a hundred spells or abilities/combos, it governs what it does give very tightly by presenting you with difficulty and risk. (Witcher 2 is definitely an action game.)

The above is so broad it could be used to argue for the depth of any game.

By making defense more important, you increase tension/excitement and difficulty. It allows for fewer mistakes and makes risk/reward contain actual risk.

Sure. There are plenty of games where this is true. I think Geralt's limited nature, combined with his fragility makes some of the more difficult fights tedious. That, plus the non-determinism in how the various procs apply to your enemies makes actually winning often very dependent on luck.

The difference between superficial growth and actual growth. By increasing skill a player improves. By increasing moneyz/shinies/etc, the game tells you have improved(not to confused with score, which is a tool to measure growth). It should be obvious which is more valuable to players who want good combat systems. (Mind you, both are very pleasurable, for almost the same reasons too.)

Except other games with what are generally considered 'good' combat systems actually use positive reinforcement (magic bars that depend on continued success and actually mean something to general performance). Maybe it's not as important for you, but game designers behind many of these games have disagreed with you.

To call into question one's ability to grade combat systems(even overall games) is perfectly valid.

Not particularly. All too often we fall into the no true scotsman fallacy:
'I don't like this combat system'
'Well, you don't know enough about action games'
'I play plenty of action games'
'Well, you don't know enough about GOOD action games'

It's foolish to take editorial content for more than it is: one man's opinion on the matter. Suggesting somehow that someone's opinion is 'wrong' because it doesn't validate your own is incredibly self-centered and frankly, dumb.

Opinions are worthless without logic, hence we have conversations.

We have conversations to exchange ideas, sure. Be careful about using the world 'logic' to describe well-formulated opinions, though. Which is all we've seen so far. This is an obvious statement, but there's no underlying truth here about the quality (or lack thereof) of TW2's combat system.

I believe the only reason Ryan(and you?) dislikes Witcher 2's combat is because he can't see passed his own ceiling. (Usually dismisses combat systems in favor of seeing more shinies: storylines, cutscenes, graphics, voice-work. Hence why he still likes the game.)

This is really dismissive of you. I gave a bunch of reasons why I dislike the combat. You seem to be unable to accept that someone could feel this way about the game. I have no problem believing that people can like the combat in the game, even if I don't understand why, so please extend the same courtesy to me.

 

[XiaNaphryz]

Anyway, he should not get a wheel if he doesn't drive or play many racing games.

But if he gets a wheel, he might start playing more racing games!

 

[Deleted member 30609]

Wow. Can't wait to see Bioshock Infinite.

 

[mik]

The racing wheel "discussion" was some profoundly stupid shit.

 

[a Master Ninja]

Bioshock Infinite Hype +775 Million

 

[firehawk12]

The racing wheel "discussion" was some profoundly stupid shit.

Is it unreasonable to dissuade someone from buying a peripheral that they'll only use once?
Friends don't let friends by a

Spoiler

Kinect

.

Also, I wonder what kind of Leigh Alexander preparations they are making. That's going to be the highlight of E3!

 

[inner-G]

Ryan doesn't know WTF he's talking about on the wheel.

Go play GT5 with one for a couple hours and then switch to a controller. Night and day.

 

[Zomba13]

Also, I wonder what kind of Leigh Alexander preparations they are making. That's going to be the highlight of E3!

I bet it's an illegal amount of preparation.

Spoiler

I can't wait

 

[Poyunch]

They should do some inside joke whenever Leigh does something obnoxious. Like sip a beer every time she interrupts somebody or do something funny on the stream whenever she does something stupid since she's not going to see it until after E3.

 

[EricDiesel]

Hit the Sonic Generations segment and Jeff could not be more biased against that game. For a start he said it's on the Wii, and didn't seem to get that it is a compilation of the history - and best of - Sonic. Honestly he could not have been more uninformed.

I'm getting kind of tired of the Sonic bias from these guys. Yes, from the Saturn era to Sonic 2006 the series was spotty and mostly shit. But Unleashed was respectable and Colors was downright GOOD. The odds that any of them played more than 30 minutes of either of those games? Pretty damn slim.

Sure, they aren't innovative or "necessary" (which is a meaningless thing to say since games as a whole aren't "needed" by anyone), but from the guy creaming his jeans over a new Mortal Kombat... Just a WEE bit hypocritical if you ask me. If MK can make a comeback after decades of sucking, why not Sonic? It's not like the new MK is some groundbreaking marvel. It's just a really good, fun Mortal Kombat game.

Sure, it could VERY easily suck. But this "Heh, nice try, Sega. Not falling for THAT again." attitude amongst gamers is pretty obnoxious to me.

 

[notworksafe]

I bet it's an illegal amount of preparation.

Spoiler

I can't wait

As much available alcohol as possible, I hope. Also no computers around for fact checking.

They should do some inside joke whenever Leigh does something obnoxious. Like sip a beer every time she interrupts somebody or do something funny on the stream whenever she does something stupid since she's not going to see it until after E3.

<>

 

[Poyunch]

<>

She had to have caught on eventually to that.

 

[V_Ben]

I know that after this podcast, I want Bioshock Infinite so bad. So. Bad.

 

[Zeliard]

That's not really positive feedback, though, that's just player skill increasing to match the game's difficulty.

Christ, your opinions are just headache-inducing.

No, it's not enough that the game has a difficulty curve based largely on player skill. I want it to give me a blowjob and bake me a cake. I want the game to love me.

 

[obonicus]

No, it's not enough that the game has a difficulty curve based largely on player skill. I want it to give me a blowjob and bake me a cake. I want the game to love me.

Because that's what I said.

 

[HamPster PamPster]

Christ, your opinions are just headache-inducing.

No, it's not enough that the game has a difficulty curve based largely on player skill. I want it to give me a blowjob and bake me a cake. I want the game to love me.

The Witcher 2 must be a pretty bad game if it left you in such a bad mood

I only play games that make me happy!

 

[Zeliard]

Because that's what I said.

Yeah, it is. When you don't think it's enough "positive reinforcement" that you actually get better at a game the better you are at it, it says more than enough.

High offense/low defense. This is the philosophy that every game from Demon's Souls to Ninja Gaiden and yes, to the Witcher 2 shares. High offense/low defense, for both you and your enemies. This makes it so that you have to put a significant amount of emphasis on defense because you can be cut down just as easily as you can cut your enemies down. This is some design flaw? It's where the sense of achievement comes from in these games.

 

[FrankT]

Bioshock Infinite as many Game of the Shows. Not a surprising call. Great impressions to be sure.

 

[Totobeni]

smh x 1000000000000000000000000000000000 @ Ryan

No,just no, Racing wheels are years and years better for simulation racing games, and they made the driving way better and more fun and enjoyable than controllers.

 

[Riposte]

This doesn't follow; what you gave isn't the definition of shallowness. Not being shallow implies a more elaborate meta-game, and I'm not seeing it -- all aforementioned uses are self-evident. At the same time, some strategies have few downsides besides being boring.

The above is so broad it could be used to argue for the depth of any game.

The tools of Witcher 2 must be used well in order to tackle the difficulty, they require you to learn tactics and those tactics matter. That is what gives it (relative) depth. You have to learn it, build it into your brain and nerves. There is a noticeable distance between the learned and unlearned(this has been expressed in this thread already, Zefah mentioned the difference between a fresh player on normal and the same player, now hardened, on hard). A game can have a dozen more tools than Witcher 2, but if you can easily get by using the stupidest and least demanding of approaches(in other-words, if the game is easy) those tools don't matter. See: Assassin's Creed and its combat system.

Sure. There are plenty of games where this is true. I think Geralt's limited nature, combined with his fragility makes some of the more difficult fights tedious. That, plus the non-determinism in how the various procs apply to your enemies makes actually winning often very dependent on luck.

You are really going to say winning is "very dependent on luck"? That's total bullshit and if you've really played Witcher 2, this shouldn't even come up. Do I even need to address that? Luck plays a small role and most significantly in certain abilities which can be manipulated. The game is otherwise completely action-based.

I refuse to call something difficult tedious. Difficulty implies the opposite, it overwhelms you. If Witcher 2 was easy, let you make a 1000 mistakes, and still long, then yeah, it would be tedious.

Not particularly. All too often we fall into the no true scotsman fallacy:
'I don't like this combat system'
'Well, you don't know enough about action games'
'I play plenty of action games'
'Well, you don't know enough about GOOD action games'

Um, the conversation hasn't been like that at all. It is not like Ryan hasn't played Bayonetta and plenty of great games. Doesn't mean he understands them, nor he can handle games which drop you into the deep end first or don't let you creditfeed.

We have conversations to exchange ideas, sure. Be careful about using the world 'logic' to describe well-formulated opinions, though. Which is all we've seen so far. This is an obvious statement, but there's no underlying truth here about the quality (or lack thereof) of TW2's combat system.

Not all opinions are created equally. Some are more "well-formulated"(/logical) than others.

This is really dismissive of you. I gave a bunch of reasons why I dislike the combat.

And it really came down to you not wanting to adapt to a high-tension, demanding style of combat. I also counterpointed those reasons very fairly, but then you pulled the magic subjectivity card as per internet law when you want to end a conversation in our totally subjective existence.

You seem to be unable to accept that someone could feel this way about the game. I have no problem believing that people can like the combat in the game, even if I don't understand why, so please extend the same courtesy to me.

I perfectly understand how and why and that someone doesn't like Witcher 2's combat. I am not attacking your feelings and sensations for those are incorporeal and, when alone, inexpressible. I am only attacking your lame reasoning and especially your very bullshit wording. It goes back to you making it seem Witcher 2's difficulty is illegitimate and it controls poorly by using buzzwords. (I argue it is "too difficult"/"too punishning"/"too negative" for someone who is bad at it and controls perfectly fine if you don't act like your actions are nonpunishable.)

 

[Neuromancer]

smh x 1000000000000000000000000000000000 @ Ryan

No,just no, Racing wheels are years and years better for simulation racing games, and they made the driving way better and more fun and enjoyable than controllers.

Not just sim racing games; arcade racing games are great too. Hydro Thunder Hurricane and Sonic Racing are fucking awesome with a wheel.

 

[Deleted member 30609]

like, she actually tears a hole into the 80s?! what the fuck is this game.

so exciting.

 

[Zeliard]

like, she actually tears a hole into the 80s?! what the fuck is this game.

so exciting.

I remember when that first Bioshock Infinite trailer came out, there was mention of something like the pictures in frames conspicuously changing, and you could sort of presume from that it had something to do with time travel or alternate dimensions.

 

[obonicus]

Yeah, it is. When you don't think it's enough "positive reinforcement" that you actually get better at a game the better you are at it, it says more than enough.

That's not what positive feedback means. If you think that's what it means, then it's a meaningless term, as it's trivially true for almost every game. I'm talking about stuff like Bayonetta's magic meter. Or NG rewarding bigger combos with more currency to buy upgrades at Muramasa. Witcher 2's adrenaline system somewhat qualifies, as said above.

High offense/low defense.

Yes, the glass cannon. I don't feel Geralt qualifies, as I said above.

This is the philosophy that every game from Demon's Souls to Ninja Gaiden and yes, to the Witcher 2 shares.

See, here I disagree. Ryu is very much a glass cannon. He can't take a lot of punishment, but he can take out enemies so quickly in the hands of a skilled player that it doesn't matter. I don't think Witcher 2 works the same way. There's a lot more attrition to the battles. Note also that in NG, bigger combos gave you more currency to go buy upgrades at Muramasa.

This makes it so that you have to put a significant amount of emphasis on defense because you can be cut down just as easily as you can cut your enemies down. This is some design flaw? It's where the sense of achievement comes from in these games.

Well, for starters, I don't think I said design flaw. Instead I said I didn't care for the way it works, I don't think it's enjoyable. I'm really sorry that this opinion seems to hurt people's feelings, maybe I should have been more clear that this isn't necessarily wrong, but not to my taste.

Look, I'm really sorry that I don't agree with some people, but I don't know what I can do about it: I can't just take your opinion as fact.

 

[obonicus]

Riposte (Zeliard too), you win. Clearly The Witcher 2 has an amazing combat system that I'm too lazy to understand. I'm sorry for offending you for suggesting otherwise. My opinions are lame and completely devoid of logic, unlike your own. Are you happy now?

Honestly, this is tiring and you're acting like a petulant child that can't accept that someone won't accept your opinion as truth. It's slightly amusing that you think your opinion is backed by 'logic', but not amusing enough to keep this going. I do wish you wouldn't pop into these threads and whine when some internet personality doesn't validate your opinion on a game, but I don't think I'll get that either.

 

[firehawk12]

She had to have caught on eventually to that.

That's when Jeff goes outside and starts his own competing stream!

I can't watch E3 live this year, so I feel like I'm going to miss out on epic moments like that.

 

[Zeliard]

That's not what positive feedback means. If you think that's what it means, then it's a meaningless term, as it's trivially true for almost every game. I'm talking about stuff like Bayonetta's magic meter. Or NG rewarding bigger combos with more currency to buy upgrades at Muramasa. Witcher 2's adrenaline system somewhat qualifies, as said above.

You're using one specific, limited definition of positive reinforcement, where the game is literally rewarding you with some new mechanic.

Visibly and clearly seeing yourself becoming better at a game also qualifies as positive reinforcement - you're being reinforced with the positivity of seeing your time spent in the game translate to you being a superior player.

I also disagree it's the same for every game. Not every game translates player skill into gameplay effectiveness to such a degree, especially in the RPG genre. In fact, one of the biggest differences between Witcher 1 and 2 is that the latter puts far more emphasis on individual player skill than the previous game which took its combat cues more from something like Diablo.

See, here I disagree. Ryu is very much a glass cannon. He can't take a lot of punishment, but he can take out enemies so quickly in the hands of a skilled player that it doesn't matter. I don't think Witcher 2 works the same way. There's a lot more attrition to the battles. Note also that in NG, bigger combos gave you more currency to go buy upgrades at Muramasa.

Geralt functions exactly like this.

You seem to think he is limited offensively. Is he, really? He has an absurd amount of tools at his disposal. Alchemy and crafting ingredients are all over the place. You can buff yourself pre-battle with many different forms of potions and oils, which can't be said for many other games with similar combat. You have many ways to incapacitate enemies - if you get an enemy stunned, i.e. with a bomb or a sign, Geralt does a one-hit kill animation and that includes tougher mobs.

The Witcher 2 puts much more emphasis on the strategic aspect of third-person combat than you usually find, while keeping the tactical element just as important. I question if the people struggling so hard with combat are making use of what a 'witcher' is given. A witcher from a both a lore and gameplay standpoint isn't just some sword fighter - his other skills and talents are hugely important in supplementing swordplay.

Riposte (Zeliard too), you win. Clearly The Witcher 2 has an amazing combat system that I'm too lazy to understand. I'm sorry for offending you for suggesting otherwise. My opinions are lame and completely devoid of logic, unlike your own. Are you happy now?

Honestly, this is tiring and you're acting like a petulant child that can't accept that someone won't accept your opinion as truth. It's slightly amusing that you think your opinion is backed by 'logic', but not amusing enough to keep this going. I do wish you wouldn't pop into these threads and whine when some internet personality doesn't validate your opinion on a game, but I don't think I'll get that either.

If you're going to spout poor logic then you shouldn't start crying when it's called out. It's tiring when people take their own deficiencies out on a game itself. I'd pay $10 to see how you guys play Witcher 2; it'd be worth it just for the laugh.

 

[Riposte]

Are you happy now?

Nope.

Yes, the glass cannon. I don't feel Geralt qualifies, as I said above.

See, here I disagree. Ryu is very much a glass cannon. He can't take a lot of punishment, but he can take out enemies so quickly in the hands of a skilled player that it doesn't matter.

This "glass cannon" business is misdirecting, but, sure, Geralt is a glass cannon. Non-boss enemies who can't block can go down very quickly. This is most obvious when you use oils(or potions) or upgrade your magic. Thing is groups of enemies cover each other. So a good player needs to know to how to consistently take down an enemy(a weak point) in spite of this using good dodging, Quen, and/or crowd control(and they can). OR he can wear them down by setting traps before hand.

 

[Zeliard]

Seems to me some people are just completely misunderstanding Witcher 2's combat. I've seen videos where people just go up to enemies hacking like they're playing God of War.

There are plenty of legitimate and not inconsiderable, concrete faults with the combat that people shouldn't be wasting time complaining about nonsense. For example, the precision. If there's one thing that hugely differentiates Witcher 2 from games like Ninja Gaiden or Demon's Souls, it's in the precision of the combat and the controls, where Witcher 2 falls significantly short.

And the beginning of the game is undoubtedly poorly balanced, or rather, poorly paced.

 

[mik]

Is it unreasonable to dissuade someone from buying a peripheral that they'll only use once?

That's totally fine. But this:

"the notion that a wheel makes racing games any more fun or realistic is a total fallacy. It's just another contrivance."

is idiotic.

 

[styl3s]

Just downloaded it on itunes, gonna listen while i play some m.a.g

My body is ready.

 

[chogidogs]

Hope they get a better house. Last year's one looked like ass. Whiskey has money now right? The Tested live stream when they were at CES looked pretty fancy.

 

[outunderthestars]

Dear God they ramble on about LA Noire forever.



Weeks like this make me wish for timestamps or an enhanced podcast with chapters

 

[Trent Strong]

Another seven hours talking about boring, broken LA Noire.

 

[Riposte]

Are they REALLY going to bring back Leah? Man, what a dumbass she is.

 

[Deleted member 17706]

Riposte (Zeliard too), you win. Clearly The Witcher 2 has an amazing combat system that I'm too lazy to understand. I'm sorry for offending you for suggesting otherwise. My opinions are lame and completely devoid of logic, unlike your own. Are you happy now?

Honestly, this is tiring and you're acting like a petulant child that can't accept that someone won't accept your opinion as truth. It's slightly amusing that you think your opinion is backed by 'logic', but not amusing enough to keep this going. I do wish you wouldn't pop into these threads and whine when some internet personality doesn't validate your opinion on a game, but I don't think I'll get that either.

No; that would be you with this post.

 

[kaskade]

ohhh sheeeeetttt

taswell: bonus bombcast serving up tomorrow with myself, @jeffgerstmann, @patrickklepek, and the man, the myth, the legend, @michaelpachter!!!

https://twitter.com/taswell/status/73620274213433344

 

[Colasante]

Hope they get a better house. Last year's one looked like ass. Whiskey has money now right? The Tested live stream when they were at CES looked pretty fancy.

At the very least they won't have to worry about the LA riots happening outside their house. For that matter, we also don't have to worry about hearing Leigh Alexander continually chant Fuck Boston if she is invited back.

 

[IamMattFox]

ohhh sheeeeetttt

https://twitter.com/taswell/status/73620274213433344

Sweet deal.

 

[Lothars]

Another seven hours talking about boring, broken LA Noire.

To me they can talk about it all they want, it's a fantastic game and one of the best of the year so far.

 

[Jintor]

There are plenty of legitimate and not inconsiderable, concrete faults with the combat that people shouldn't be wasting time complaining about nonsense. For example, the precision. If there's one thing that hugely differentiates Witcher 2 from games like Ninja Gaiden or Demon's Souls, it's in the precision of the combat and the controls, where Witcher 2 falls significantly short.

And the beginning of the game is undoubtedly poorly balanced, or rather, poorly paced.

I agree with this position.

 

[EricDiesel]

For that matter, we also don't have to worry about hearing Leigh Alexander continually chant Fuck Boston if she is invited back.

Oh, she'll find some way to slip it in. She IS fine with "fuck Boston" every day, after all.

[/Is from MA. Doesn't watch any sports.]

 

[Barrett2]

Should I buy a racing wheel?

 

[dejan]

Just in case Vinny's lurking around here:

Fanatec Porsche 911 GT2 Wheel (PC/PS3/360):

Clubsport Pedals USB

Porsche wheel Shifter set

RennSport Wheel Stand V2

Do it Vinny ... just don't ask for prices!

 

[HamPster PamPster]

After watching the Dirt 3 Quicklook I get where Vinny is coming from... I want a wheel now too Man that game looked great (at least until Vinny made Drew turn on all the UI stuff)

Racing games are a genre I wish I played more but I just don't like using a controller. But Ryan is probably right, maybe I should just spend any wheel money on non-racing games instead

 

[bigdaddygamebot]

I want it to give me a blowjob and bake me a cake. I want the game to love me.

Day one.

 

[C Jones]

Another seven hours talking about boring, broken LA Noire.

Personally I don't think the game is boring, but generally speaking I'm with you on the broken part. I like the game, but I really wish Jeff had played it because I think he'll point out the flaws, specifically in the game's conversation sections. It seems out of the gaming podcasts I listen to, the person that likes to play devils advocate on the podcast has not played the game (i.e. Garnett didn't play it so he couldn't talk about it on Weekend Confirmed). Frustrating since the convo just turns into people hyping the game up for 30-60 minutes like nothing is wrong with it.

 

[Neuromancer]

My setup:

That's an old photo, the room is a little more furnished now and I also have a surround sound system hooked up.

I literally can't imagine playing racing games any other way now. It's so much fun and like I said, it's not just for sim games. Arcade racing games are a blast too.

 

[LCfiner]

Just in case Vinny's lurking around here:

Fanatec Porsche 911 GT2 Wheel (PC/PS3/360):
http://www.abload.de/img/shopqnxs.jpg[IMG]

Clubsport Pedals USB
[IMG]http://www.abload.de/img/clubsport_pedals_usb_0bk0z.jpg[IMG]

Porsche wheel Shifter set
[IMG]http://www.abload.de/img/pwts_shifter_both9mhl.jpg[IMG]

RennSport Wheel Stand V2
[IMG]http://www.abload.de/img/rsws_webshop_us_013jmt.jpg[IMG]

Do it Vinny ... just don't ask for prices![/QUOTE]

those pedals are amazing. just, seriously amazing. I have the turbo s instead of the GT2 but they're kinda similar. very good feeling wheel with buttery smooth feedback and a nice thick wheel diameter for gripping.

but it's the pedals that freak me out more than anything else. complete aluminum construction and a real solid feel that's super impressive for a consumer product.

I think I'll need to get the clubsport shifter when it hits. it's supposed to be soon as they dropped the price on the old shifter set in anticipation

 

[EmCeeGramr]

Personally I don't think the game is boring, but generally speaking I'm with you on the broken part. I like the game, but I really wish Jeff had played it because I think he'll point out the flaws, specifically in the game's conversation sections. It seems out of the gaming podcasts I listen to, the person that likes to play devils advocate on the podcast has not played the game (i.e. Garnett didn't play it so he couldn't talk about it on Weekend Confirmed). Frustrating since the convo just turns into people hyping the game up for 30-60 minutes like nothing is wrong with it.

L.A. Noire looks amazing and I'm hoping to get it soon, but I'll admit being worried during the PSN TNT when someone called in asking if Ryan also got frustrated with the logic of the game being out of sync ("thinking too far ahead") with the player. That's the exact problem with games like Phoenix Wright and other adventure games, and the way Ryan just shrugged it off as, "it's totally logical, you're not looking at the evidence and logic correctly, you're trying to make logical connections that don't exist," gave me the sinking feeling that it totally does have busted or contrived logic at times.

Still excited about trying it, though.



The racing wheel segment was hilarious. Normally when there's some bizarre comment like "racing wheels don't do anything, they're meaningless contrivances," it's just left there and the entire foursome just accepts this unorthodox assertion as self-evident and moves on and then people sperg out about it in threads and comments. But this time it was the funniest things ever. Vinny's refusal to believe that racing wheels are worthless, combined with B/J/R all ganging up on him and the way it just wouldn't end pushed it into laugh-out-loud territory.