+1

Not sure where you get that they are a small company. It is my understanding that their company is made up of about 300+people. I could be wrong about that but Im pretty sure, and not all of them are gonna be devs, but Im sure if that number is accurate then their team is well over 100 people.

Ultimately, I would highly reccomend that any of you play Witcher 2. It is an excellent game and you can easily enjoy both. Some will like it better and some wil like Skyrim better. Witcher 2 does some great unique things and Skyrim does some great unique things. It would be a shame if any of you guys missed out on a great experience for either title because of some sort of taking sides. Alt of us here love Witcher 2, its about games and experiences guys, enjoy as many of them as you can. Its like food!! everyone likes different foods!

Wrong.
Inteligent people are always eager to learn. From anyone. Anytime.
Fortunately, Bethesda is led by inteligent people.



And, supposedly, waht's the corolary of that? That Bethesda can't learn even a minute lesson from The Witcher 2?



By whom? Who is - namely, on this board - who is getting over-hyped? And in which instances have you witnessed such alledged over-hyoeing? Even if such behaviour does exist here at least it is over a RPG that's actually out for people to play and draw their own conclusions.



You might want to check the reviews first. And then the dictionary, under the letter ?L?.



Some people appear to be hard at work trying to turn this thread into a vs one.
Why?
Because, apparently, it would hurt their feelings to even contemplate the idea their precious Skyrim is anything less than marble flawlessness.



That remark is borderline insulting. Whose intelligence level has almost dropped, really?



When people - men and women - enter advlthood they usually begin an active six life. six just becomes part of their everyday existences. This of course means the WItcher 2 addresses an issue that is peculiar to advlthood where the ES tends to overlook it. Hence, on this instance, The Withcer 2 appears to be a more mature game.
But who knows how Skyrim will handle nudity and six.
Heck, maybe Bethesda learned something from other games.
Mindblowing.
Go figure.

This is precisely what I'm trying to say.

The Witcher 2 is an 'I`m waiting for Skyrim' game,and that`s why it`s going to be successful for the next six months.After that goodbye!
Maybe Oblivion could`ve evolved over the years with mods and patches so that I wouldn`t have this compulsion to waste my money on
something clearly inferior.But maybe not many people agree with me on that. :facepalm:

cons........to much rolling around

pros........i like their potion system alot better, minus the meditation thing. i would also like to see drinking animations that last a couple of seconds so that if you are in combat you have to be intelligent about when you take your potions cause you will be vulnerable for a couple of seconds and you cant take them one after another after another. oblivion had a function that supposedly prevented you from spamming potions but it was a total joke. it only lasted a couple of seconds and you could still take up to four of them at once with high alchemy.

i loved that the game was actually a challenge to win. you are geralt a witcher who was created and engineered to be the ultimate monster slayer and swordsman. the nice thing about the game is you can indeed be a kickass swordsman, but you actually have to work for it. you cant just stand there and spam attacks like you could in oblivion. you had to dodge and block and use bombs and traps and stuff especially against bosses and multiple enemies.

Ah vsions you are indeed a wise one :bowdown:

I agree with everything you said. Just play both games guys. TW2 is very good, imo Skyrim will be better but even so they're different games, with different goals

Great post, vsions :goodjob:
Thanks

If thats all it was then post it in the Witcher II page forums not Bethesda's TES forums.

I felt that Oblivion was a pretty linear game story-wise. There were pretty much only 4 options for most quests and they were: pass, fail, decline, accept and then ignore. That means you either do it one way or you don't do it at all. I think of quests as events in the game that I can take part in rather than scripted stories that lead me around by the hand. If the event has more possible outcomes based on how I participated in the event I will enjoy it that much more. After you do a lot of those open-ended events you will realize how the game is less linear and you have more freedom because the evidence is right there in front of you to see and experience. Unfortunately a lot of people in these forums equate freedom of choice in quests as "restricting because then you can not experience everything in a game"... wait a minute.... they want fewer options because having no decisions increases their options.... I think there is a fallacy in the logic they are using. Perhaps Skyrim will allow those players to learn the difference by experience, or it will just be a linear game like Oblivion.

Personally, I hope they take alot from other games. Not straight copying, mind you but pointers. Games such as Risen and The Witcher (both 1 and 2) do many things right which the recent Beth games haven't done. There's no need to not learn from others if the subject suits the product you're making.



It gave you a huge popup right before the battle for Hoover Dam in which it told you that after this point there is no turning back and if you have something you wish to do in the Mojave, you should go do it now. How could you miss/misunderstand that? And if you do not care for the story, why would you take part in it and then take offence that it has a conclusion? Don't end the game if the story and the ending doesn't suit you, there was nothing forcing you forward. The reason the ending was there (according to the devs), was because there were multiple endings and there was no possibility to implement all the consequences of your actions and all possible ending variations, and having the game just "not end" without any consequence would've jeopardized the impact of the ending they had planned (and I agree with that).

As said, load a previous save and go on for as long as you please. If a story isn't your cup of tea, you shouldn't mind it being there and not having a play after ending possibility shouldn't be a problem as you don't have to touch the story and end the game until you wish to.

What I have seen from Skyrim gives me no inclination that it will have just average graphic, I do not know where people are even coming up with that. Even When Oblivion launched it was considered cutting edge but Gears of War a very linear game had it beat in graphics. There will always be games mostly shooters that have the best graphics. The witcher 2 cannot compete with Crysis 1 in graphics and that came out 4 years ago so there will always be a better game. With all fairness to Skyrim it is not fair to judge it's graphics until we see a demo where you get some time to really look at everything closely and even then it can never be compared to witcher to until probably release when you can view the PC graphics.

I would like to see Skyrim darker which it looks like with more brutality gore and a grittier look. However I do not need to see pixelated briasts and constant swearing for it to feel "mature" , actually most of that is the opposite of mature even a little childish. Peoples complaints about Oblivion also are far to over the top, some things i can understand but to act like it was some bad game is absurd. Skyrim will he it's own game and comparison's to Witcher are not fair to either game, both are RPGs but it is like comparing Gears of War to Call of Duty or Crysis, completely different styled games despite being shooters.

I did not like the first Witcher game as much as I had hoped I thought the combat was boring and lost interest in the story. Maybe if I had gutted through part of it Id enjoy it more but you should never have to force yourself to do something supposed to be fun. This is why I am hesitant to get the witcher 2. Not saying they are bad games they just did not seem to be for me. As far as TES games they are linear in story and quest but they way you approach those quests and the fact you can go any where and do anything before it makes it a very non linear game.

In all honesty, you just can't expect a multi-platform game to have the visual aesthetics of a PC exclusive.

That's just how it works.

Yeah? oh really? Elaborate how? -Birthsigns- were restrictive, because statement you apply to nearly -EVERYTHING- ..........Attributes? they were restrictive, Birthsigns? they were restrictive, Atheltics? they were restrictive, like really? I would LOVE to hear -why- and -how- birthsigns were restrictive.

Elaborate again? Mk, we've both contributed in many, many threads on that topic. I'd rather not go there again.

Because you DIDNT...

I'm sorry you feel that way. If you want to discuss it through PM's i'm cool with that. I'm not steering this thread in that direction though. It's also close to post limit.

Why are we talking about attributes again?
Especially since Witcher 2 didn't had attributes either, but nobody seems to complain about it...

You have 5 posts to actually give a reason why here even more incentive since not much else can be saud, you said the same thing last time I don't see the different between PM and here, For once in your post history that can be refered to, please state how the heck are birthsigns restrictive.... for once I'd like people who toss false statements to say WHY their statements are "true"

Bukee.....no,, bad bukee, Ignore Ignore now

I asked you kindly to take this to PM. You've ignored my request and are now being rude and demanding. We're done here.

rofl.....look im not sure why your trying to turn this into a personal matter, all I asked was for you to elaborate why birthsigns are restrictive, other people ask others to elaborate on things unclear on the forums and do so without problem, I don't want to discuss this on PM because these traded statements WONT appear for others to see when they check profile messages. :shrug: but whatever just you avoiding questions again

Ok, we agree to disagree then, i certainly don't want any more linearity or story being added into the Elder Scrolls, there are already many fine (according to others) RPG's out there just like the witcher 2 that already have that, whereas elder scrolls is the only true sandbox RPG available.




If it was that obvious then that was my own fault, i certainly don't remember it, i remember a vague warning saying i was about to throw my lot in with the NCR.




Offence? that is too strong a word, i was annoyed that in order to continue exploring the game i had to reload a save 30 or 40 minutes old because the game decides to pack up shop and close down on me, i am not used to bethesda games doing this, and i forgot this was now an Obsidian game because of the familiar looking game engine, not that i knew anything about them before as i have already mentioned, i avoid linear games.



Well i can understand this point to some degree, for me it means nothing as the story would have had very little "impact" as you say, either way, i enjoy my games while i am playing them, not so much after they are fnished, the memories are great but not a substitute for ongoing gameplay.



You say "load a previous save" i say "give me a small option to continue the game after the credits roll", so we agree to disagree again, no problem, it's just opinions, i only mind a story if it ends my game or has too intrusive a hold on my gaming.

Great post OP.

The dumbing down has afflicted most developers, and CDP has proven that the opposite philosophy generates MORE interest in your game.

Hopefully Todd reads this.

I'd actually say Skyrim has more interest 5 months from release than W2 did an hour before its release.

That we do.

Although, I'm still a bit confused about why would you mind a well written story if you don't care about it? I mean, TES is TES, the story it will have will be linear (and probably cliched and weak), the game will not be made linear at the terms of the story (I think we can count on that), so why shouldn't the story be strong?

(or did I misunderstand something?)