Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings was released
in May of 2011. Four years after Witcher 1, and three years
after Witcher 1: Enhanced Edition. Witcher 2 was similarly updated with a free
Enhanced Edition in 2012. The game was met with a moderate amount of
fanfare and reviewed quite well—in no small part because it appeared like a much better
produced game than Dragon Age 2 that came out a few months earlier in March of that
year. I played both of these games at release but
I didn't finish either of them. For Dragon Age 2 that was because I was hopelessly
addicted to World of Warcraft at the time and was pulled back into a raid tier. For Witcher 2 the reasons are a bit more serious—my
mother died. I only got to the second chapter of Witcher
2 back then and I didn't play it again until making this video. It normally wouldn't be worth bringing up
at all but I'm doing so to make it clear that I was enjoying it enough to finish it back
then—it's that I couldn't for obvious reasons. So my experience of playing this game at release,
before the Enhanced Edition, is incomplete and you should know that. There are some important comparisons we can
draw to Witcher 2 from Dragon Age 2 and World of Warcraft—same goes for the zones in Witcher
3, actually. But for now let's see how the story continues
from Witcher 1 since this sequel is set only one month after the events of the first game. The pre-credits cinematic shows an assassin
attack King Foltest and Geralt saving the day, using his reward for saving the city
as an unexpected weapon. Then we get the final shot on the dead assassin's
face—it's another witcher! Except when I first saw this I thought it
looked so much like Geralt that it was some sort of mysterious clone or something. And that's how they were going to explain
how Geralt is back from the dead. There were multiples of him walking around
and that's why people were confused. But, um, clearly they didn't go that route
and I was crazy for thinking that. So Witcher 1 ends with Geralt in a complicated
situation—but still a prosperous one. He has earned the favor of the ruler of one
of the largest Kingdoms in the Northern Realms. He has just saved him for a second time, and
he's many thousands of orens richer for his trouble. Then Witcher 2 begins and we find Geralt like
this: Witcher 2 has many—maybe even dozens—of continuity errors from the first game. It has so many that later I will argue that
Witcher 1 probably shouldn't be considered a reliable source of the events that happened
and should instead be treated like an embellished tale from Dandelion who gets many facts wrong. And I should also point out right now that
I made a mistake in the first video by not clarifying that Dandelion is the same character
as Jaskier from the Netflix series. So if you only watched the Netflix show you
may have been confused when I started talking about Dandelion interchangeably with Jaskier
and I'm sorry that I didn't make that clear. Jaskier is a much better name for that character
in my opinion but in the games and the translated versions of the books that I read that character
is called Dandelion. I believe the more direct translation is Buttercup? But let's leave that. So because the games and the books call him
that we're going to call him Dandelion for the rest of this video series, but just think
Jaskier if you've watched the Netflix show. To be clear there's no way that this is intentional—the
idea that Dandelion is the one telling the story and that's why there are so many continuity
errors and mistakes between the games—but I'm proposing it as a way to allow the trilogy
to exist more elegantly with the reality that was CD Projekt's limited budget with the first
game, plus them not knowing how big the series would grow. Or if they would have the chance to make a
sequel at all, never mind one of the biggest games and most celebrated games of all time. This is a very understandable problem, and
I'm willing to accept and even propose this soft-retcon in order to make it work. However this opening is not one of these continuity
issues. It's a great contrast to make you wonder how
it all went so wrong so quickly. It also introduces you to Vernon Roche, who
you don't yet know is going to be one of the most important characters in the whole game. An extraordinary amount of information about
what has already happened is presented to you while also expertly laying the foundation
for what's going to happen next. This prologue is split into five sections
that you can choose to go through in a non-linear order. You start in the prison, recount the events
of the day, and then end in the prison with an escape sequence. This is the closest the games ever get to
the storytelling style of the books. Fragmented, full of changes in perspective,
with so many time jumps that are frankly unnecessary but still entertaining. It's really good stuff and I think it works
well here too by cutting out some of the downtime that would happen between these sections,
and also granting the full city siege a holistic quality that would have required way more
work if every part of it was to be seamlessly linked: the staging grounds, the attack in
the streets, the dragon's ambush, finding a way to open the gate, and then the final
section when Foltest is assassinated. Because the title of this game doesn't mess
around. There will be spoilers in this video by the
way. I figure the video's length should make that
obvious—I'll be revealing all the plot details of Witcher 2 and making a few references to
events in Witcher 3 and the books. Naturally I'll also be building on arguments
and details about the plot and the gameplay that I spoke about in the video that I made
on the first game. If you watched that video all the way through
before watching this one, you may be distracted by what you're seeing on the screen. Witcher 2 is a very different game than Witcher
1. It does still have the same DNA and shares
much of its structure, but almost everything has been redesigned to have a broader appeal—it's
gone through the Trial of the Masses. It's mutated. And not all for the better. The updated visuals are the easiest thing
to notice. This is a drastic change in only four years
but perhaps not as drastic as the jump in quality of my microphone from the first video
to this one. Witcher 1... ...snuck that one in there seamlessly,
yeah right on target. Witcher 1, for as much as I enjoy its visual
presentation, largely looked dated even at its launch. 2007 was the year of Crysis, BioShock, Halo
3, Mass Effect, Modern Warfare, and Assassin's Creed—a game that CD Projekt clearly enjoyed
judging from this Easter Egg found in the Prologue. Witcher 2, on the other hand, was one of the
best looking games available when it launched. At max settings it brought many high-end PCs
to their breaking points and that can hold true even today. On my super video rendering machine that I
built specifically to make this video, it cannot run at a stable 60 FPS at 1440p with
Ubersampling turned on. And there's an RTX 2080 Ti in this computer. High visual fidelity was clearly a priority
for CD Projekt. I used to think this was a change going from
the first game but now I can recognize how much work went into making Witcher 1 look
as good as possible within the limitations of their budget and the Aurora Engine that
they licensed from BioWare. Something that they say they heavily modified
to make Witcher 1 and I believe them. For Witcher 2, CD Projekt made their own engine
and that came with its fair share of hype and a little bragging—and rightfully so. I have never forgotten this PC Gamer article
where a Senior Producer on the game blatantly said “We look better” in regards to Witcher
2 versus other RPGs at the time. Poking particularly again, it seemed to me,
at Dragon Age 2. I have never forgotten this because it seemed
so outlandish to me back then—this small company on their second game is pushing their
graphics front and center against the much bigger developers? They were ahead at the time and the balls
on CD Projekt sure didn't have shrink physics—and they only continued to grow with the beauty
in Witcher 3. You can also see in this PC Gamer article
how many iterations they must have gone through for Geralt's appearance. This is true for Witcher 3 as well. Older promotional material shows different
versions of the characters and I think the final versions are always the best ones. Here Geralt looks quite weasely. Here he looks like a British chav. The final version is superior to both and
also what I think best matches how he's described in the books. He looks more human than in Witcher 1 but
remains distinctly odd-looking. CD Projekt were right about their visuals
though. Witcher 2 still looks good today, although
it is showing its age—again just like in the first game it's in the character models
more than anything else. I always forget how big of a jump in quality
it is when I move on from 1 to 2. Just like I forget how there's arguably an
even bigger increase from 2 to 3. Unfortunately there are signs of numerous
growing pains in this first sequel. The best way to describe it is that the game
feels... burnt. The whole experience has this seared edge
to it like it was left out in the sun too long. The visuals, the gameplay, the UI, the conversations,
and even the story. I'd only call some parts of this game bad
but all of it is off in some way. We'll come back to visuals because gameplay
is the best way to show what I mean here. Many people don't get past the first fight
in Witcher 2. At release I remember hearing tons of complaints
about it. The very first battle was a brick wall to
many players and they just gave up. The top suspect was how you're thrust into
the thick of it without much in the way of a tutorial—something that was fixed in a
patch but honestly even this tutorial is rough around the edges. The first time I tried it, having already
played the game for about ten hours at release, I still didn't think some of its directions
were very clear. The lack of a proper tutorial certainly exacerbated
this issue and made the opening worse for some players but I don't think that's the
core issue. The problem is found in Witcher 2's horrendous
gamefeel in combat encounters and, just like Witcher 1, it looking way more like an action
game than it really is. Mass Effect 2 properly made the transition
from RPG-with-shooter-elements to Third-Person-Shooter-with-RPG-elements. Witcher 2 is much more of an action game than
Witcher 1 but it's still only about 60-70% of the way there. Here are the big changes: gone is the cursor
for aiming. Instead you have something like Z-targeting
or you can use the automatic soft-lock for enemies that are nearby. You can move the camera independently of where
Geralt will attack, and those attacks are done with mouse clicks. Left for light attacks. Right for strong attacks. Pressing E will do a block or you can hold
it for a guard state. Space bar will do a dodge roll which you can
still control with adjusted movement while in the middle of it. Signs are cast with Q and use the same targeting
as melee swings. Holding down CTRL allows you to select different
signs to bind to Q and also any quick items like a throwing knife or a bomb. These are the PC controls of course. The game was also released on Xbox 360. For one of my playthroughs I tried to play
Witcher 2 with a gamepad and turning while moving became this jittery motion that feels
way worse than it looks so I gave up. But this might have been a glitch or some
conflict between my controls so your mileage may vary. I highly doubt that it works this way on Xbox
360. The game has something like a stamina system
with its Vigor meter. These are charges that are used to cast signs
or block attacks. Each point of Vigor that's missing will lower
your damage output until it recharges, which is done simply by waiting around. Backstabs are another big part of the new
combat system and you can both deal and receive much higher damage from strikes dealt to the
back of character models. Like Witcher 1, there is a talent tree that
can modify every part of this combat system. The difference is that the nodes aren't only
about stats. You can unlock more Vigor points, more life,
lower received backstab damage, and modify just about anything else with numbers tied
to it. But you can also gain the ability to throw
knives, perfectly counter enemy hits with your block, a finisher move, increased dodge
roll distance, and even a new Witcher sign. There's also now a combat log to show you
how all of this plays out. This probably sounds like a huge improvement
from Witcher 1. It has a system that is tremendously more
based on player input instead of dice rolls and stat checks. And while that is true... I can say with confidence that Witcher 2 has
terrible combat. It has a lot of potential! Probably the most out any of these three games. But it's not just the worst Witcher combat. It's one of the worst fantasy third person
sword and sorcery combat systems that I have ever seen. Gone is the Lock-And-Key style of fights from
the first game, where the most important decision you had to make was the right sword and stance
to match the weakness of your enemy. After that every fight was essentially the
same—combo the attack at the right time since your attacks didn't change depending
on the enemy's type, position, or anything really. Since all of the decisions and timing were
loaded onto Geralt's end of the gameplay, every enemy could have been a training dummy
for how you were meant to engage them—with only a few exceptions. Which is why I barely spoke about it in the
first video because there's hardly anything to speak about. Witcher 2's combat system departs entirely
from this—decisions are much more complex, involve several more variables, both player
and enemy positioning matters greatly, and there's now a focus on whiffs and punishment
instead of Lock-And-Key with heavy stat weighting. I want you to see more of it before I explain
why I think this new system is a failure although you already might be understanding based on
the footage I'm using. Back in the Prologue—this early on your
options are very limited and so combat is mostly about running around waiting for Vigor
to come back or waiting for an opening. I've beaten this game on Dark Mode and I still
find myself abusing the AI to get through these first sections. It almost feels like it's the intended thing
to do. And so it's little surprise that so many people
were frustrated when they first played it back at release. Or maybe even today. So let's make like a Protoss and pile-on to
this dramatic opening. Witcher 2 (that's such a dumb joke). Witcher 2 is my least favorite game in this
trilogy but it is by far the most interesting of them. If you want to see what video games can do
with player agency within narratives—and the furthest that I've seen Impactful Choices
ever taken—then you should play Witcher 2. It is easily one of the most complicated games
I have ever played and a large reason why these videos took even longer to make than
they should have. It's like the Chapter Five portion of Witcher
1 spread over an entire game, and for that reason I'm going to have to recap much of
the events point by point because all of the different choices and consequences are the
game for some sections. It's unlikely that you've played the game—never
mind played it three, four, five, seven times to see all the different options. And they won't make sense unless you have
a good foundation to understand them all. There's one other thing that I think is easy
to overlook when going from game to game within a series—how you interact with it outside
of its major gameplay. It's natural to focus on the combat changes
when the interface and dialogue has changed just as much. If not more. It's no secret that Witcher 2 was designed
from the ground up to be playable on consoles and so, despite having PC as its primary platform
with enough beautiful graphics options to make TotalBiscuit blush, it feels like a port
of a console game. My low amount of game development experience
is going to show here but I want to say this anyway: I don't understand why PC versions
of games can't have tweaked interfaces. And not just Witcher 2—all of these games
that feel like console ports. This game's menus are a cluttered mess compared
to what can be done with navigation for a mouse and keyboard and only SEVEN items can
be shown on the screen at once. Like you're viewing your inventory through
a tight pair of goggles. SEVEN, with so much space being used for larger
font, descriptions, and pointless decoration—there are more inventory categories on the screen
than the inventory list itself. Look at this Pokemon bag bullshit. Witcher 3 does it better but it's unfortunate
that Witcher 1 feels like the best of the three if a bit rough visually. Using the mouse to inspect your environment
and open tabs is also gone, and seeing what things can be interacted with has been designated
to using your wolf medallion to send out a spider-sense-like magical pulse. Default key Zed. Again this reeks of an idea made to make things
better for console players although I struggle to understand why a toggle button that you
hold down to make things light up wouldn't have been better even for them as well—which
is almost exactly what they did in Witcher 3. Most baffling of all is that this pulse has
a cooldown. So if you loot areas quickly, or are moving
from one area to another at a good pace, you will have to wait for this to charge up again. Infuriatingly it also can't be used while
moving and so you stop in place for a second on every pulse use. The only possible explanation I can think
for this limitation is so you can't scan relentlessly for traps on the ground—but these traps
aren't found very often in the game and, even when you do walk on them, they only do a chip
of damage to you. I think the stat bars at the top left are
the only improvement here, although I will admit I like the mutated sticky style of the
menus even if I dislike their low and cramped functionality. The exception with those stat bars is the
adrenaline counter that unlocks when you acquire a final talent in a tree. This takes up too much screen space for what
ends up being a move you will rarely use. On the other side of the screen we have the
mini-map which I am neutral about. We'll speak more about mini-maps in Witcher
3 but all I'll say now is that the biggest crime Witcher 2's system commits is that the
map is often wrong. That leaves us with dialogue changes and how
CD Projekt was four years ahead of Bethesda with one of the most controversial changes
in Fallout 4. Gone are all of the transcribed dialogue lines
that you can select. Gone are most conversations having several
in a list to choose from. Witcher 1 did occasionally have some issues
here—like this option you have when speaking to the dentist after Chapter Two. “People dislike you.” You don't unlock this option from learning
anything about the dentist. This is something Geralt the character has
intuitively felt out separately from the player and so you have no idea what the tone or context
of this is going to be, same for any follow-up dialogue Geralt can speak after the first
choice you make. But this seldom happens in that game and Witcher
2 is a whole new beast. We're not quite at a dialogue wheel but we're
close—short descriptions and prompts for a general idea of what Geralt will say that,
I'm guessing, are also to make it easier on people who are sitting on a couch playing
on a console. Intentionally or not, the game punches you
right in the stomach with this change in the first scene. Geralt has been thrown into this room with
his hands bound. Roche comes in and tries to shake his hand
not realizing that Geralt can't do that. This choice pops up: “Very funny”. Which when chosen causes Geralt to say: Which is the best way I can think of to end
this introduction for the second game. I hope you liked the first video. This is the second one. Welcome to Witcher 2. The Grand Experiment of player agency and
decisions. The Great Mutation for the series. This is the Prologue. The tent scene opens with a mound of visual
storytelling. Especially the beautiful plot sleeping next
to Geralt. Triss is back and the two seem to be madly
in love and/or lust with each other. If you chose Shani in Witcher 1 then it doesn't
matter. None of the choices involving them or Alvin
make a difference here. They are never brought up again and Triss
treats you exactly the same no matter what happened. For a serious example of visual storytelling,
and how much of a step up this is from the first game, we can look to this guard who
decides to launch into a formal announcement of all of the King's titles and courtly manners,
irritating Geralt and showing how uncomfortable he is in his current role, in order to linger
for as long as possible to leer at Triss. And we all cringe and laugh at him despite
just doing the exact same thing. “Mature themes” are a staple of the Witcher
series. You can't talk about the games online for
more than a few minutes before the full ten inches of the “maturity” point is erected
into the conversation. The thing I have to wonder though is if that
“maturity” is simply code for boobies for many people who like these games. I'm not going to be so brazen to call them
a majority but I do suspect that a significant amount of people are fans of this series,
or only became interested in the Witcher games, because it was one of the first high profile
releases to have sex scenes with uncensored nudity. This isn't something that CD Projekt shied
away from either—Triss had a spread in Poland's Playboy the same month the game was released. Curiously it felt to me that Witcher 3 took
a small step back from the sex and nudity. Witcher 2 practically opens with it. The tryst with Triss aside, Witcher 2's opening
is exponentially stronger than Witcher 1's. It starts cozy with this private conversation
wherein some gaps about the month that has passed are filled in. Geralt is having regular dreams about The
Wild Hunt. He still hasn't recovered his memories and
the player still isn't sure what The Wild Hunt even is, although book readers will know. Geralt is frustrated that he's been forced
into the position of the King's bodyguard and pet witcher after saving him from the
assassin in Vizima's castle. These are the parts that are continued well
from the first game. In terms of scale and production values just
this Prologue feels like it cost more to make than the entirety of Witcher 1. This first staging area is teeming with detail,
even in its backgrounds. There are optional conversations here—one
that fills you in that Geralt hasn't stopped monster hunting in this month break—and
one of them is the first Impactful Decision in the game. This could very well be the third conversation
you have and it's already an important choice that can go one of three ways. It's also a book reference to the story where
Geralt and Yennefer joined a group hunting a dragon. Season One, Episode Six of the Netflix series
if you've watched it. And even better that story is actually relevant
to the larger story in Witcher 2—you just don't know that yet. You have the chance to soak in more background
conversations while you search the camp, plus try out the new version of dice poker and
the new arm wrestling mini-game. Or you can head right to Foltest and begin
the siege. Witcher 2 has one of, if not the most, complicated
plots I have ever come across in a game. There's a specific reason for that—one we'll
get to much later—and it's something that sets this game apart from most stories. There are going to be a lot of names so I
recommend you try to remember the faces of NPCs to tie them to scenes they show up in. I'll also try to flash headshots when appropriate
to jog your memory so you can keep track of them all. Except for Foltest—he'll be dead soon so
you won't have to keep track of him. This other guy won't be though. Shilard—an ambassador from Nilfgaard. The empire in the south that in the past has
launched two failed invasions against the Northern Kingdoms and have now settled into
a formally agreed upon peace treaty with them. He's here to assist the King's efforts at
securing his crown and maintain peace throughout all the realms. Just like the opening of Witcher 1's info
dump, most of this will be complete nonsense that can stay happily as flavorful dressing
if you haven't read the books. But if you have then it all makes sense. I can't stress that enough. I honestly can't believe how almost all of
it makes sense if you read the books. Witcher 1 best matches the fantastical atmosphere
that the books have about the world but isn't much in the way of a progression—it's like
a side story with some of the same characters. Witcher 2 is the most faithful game to Sapkowski's
works as a continuation of this world and the most rewarding to those who read them—unless
you love the characters of Yennefer and Ciri so much that you can ignore the problems of
book continuity in Witcher 3 just to enjoy them being on the screen. Which is fair I enjoy those characters a lot
too. Where Witcher 2 is lacking, however, is in
that fantastical fairytale folklore feeling. It isn't completely absent but this sequel
is far more about politics and kingdoms butting heads against each other—which is why it's
surprising to me that it's a worthy expansion on that side of the story from the books. Video games don't usually handle this level
of complexity very well—or, far more accurately, video game writing is rarely given the priority
it needs to handle this level of complexity very well. Foltest is waging war within in his own Kingdom. Due to your actions in Witcher 1, his daughter
Princess Adda is either dead or married off to King Radovid of Redania. With Foltest lacking a direct, legitimate
heir capable of inheriting the throne, two bastard children he fathered with a noble
woman have suddenly become politically dangerous. The mother is Maria Louisa La Valette (try
saying that three times fast) and already, in the space of a month, rival noble families
are mobilizing to take down the Foltest line. Foltest himself also seems ready to officially
recognize his bastard children but there's been a bit of a spat about it so a couple
of thousand people have to die. Once again I feel ashamed to say that I like
Foltest. He walks through his army with confidence
and is very familiar with his war machines. He's not afraid to bloody or dirty his hands. He stops and greets an unimportant arbalest
and remembers his name from a previous campaign. There's an air of confidence, respect, and
arrogance around the King, but also fairness and a no nonsense attitude. He doesn't speak that much differently from
the commoners he rules over. Shilard is comparatively far more ostentatious. But that could also be how his accent comes
across in this world so it's a little hard to tell. After aiming a ballista shot—which you can
actually hit the target with if you aim lower than you think you need to—you climb through
a siege tower and ride across the battlefield to storm La Valette castle. There's more back and forth between Foltest
and Geralt here and I get the impression the King values Geralt less as a bodyguard and
more as someone who treats him like a person rather than just a King, even if Geralt still
knows his place. We jump back to Roche after this and, depending
on the order you choose to do this Prologue in, you may have already seen some of the
other parts or you can continue in chronological order. Witcher 2 has so much jank that I'm going
to condense it into a neutron star for its own section later, but right now I have to
point out that any gear you imported from Witcher 1 is present in this Prologue and
has to be manually equipped every single time you move onto each of these sections as Geralt
retells the day to Roche. See I told you I would bitch about it when
we got here. I'm also annoyed that the legendary swords
and armor that you might have from completing epic level quests in the first game have worse
stats than common junk you can find in the sequel. I know the easy rebuttal to this is that “Wouldn't
this destroy the feeling of gear progression in this game if you started out with close
to the best gear?” The answer to that is yes, of course, but
we already know Geralt is imprisoned after this. He loses all of the rest of his items and
money from the first game so why not also use this opportunity to do a gear reset too? Instead the swords and armor are taken away
from you and then given back after you escape the prison. There was a perfect solution sitting there
already. Yes this would cheapen the impact of importing
the gear but the game already does that by making it as worthless as youtube's dislike
button just a few hours in. Importing armor and swords, or having a placeholder
high level set for players not importing saves, also could have helped smooth out the difficulty
battering ram that is the first few fights in this game. Witcher 2's combat has an inverted difficulty
curve. Let that sink in. Except for two bosses, the game's enemies
do not come anywhere close to keeping up with how much more powerful Geralt becomes as you
fill out the talent tree and acquire new gear. This would make more sense for the first game
since Geralt has amnesia and he's regaining his abilities very very quickly. So he becomes very powerful as the game goes
on so his opponents would become easier. This isn't the case in the first game so you
could argue that they did it here in the second one but then in the third game Geralt is reverted
back to a lower power level so that explanation doesn't quite make sense to me either, unfortunately. A temporary power boost at the beginning from
imported equipment could have alleviated this problem and maybe allowed players to ease
into the system and then build complexity on top of it—or at least have a narrative
impact with Geralt having strong shiny gear before he's thrown in prison and gets metroided. You could have felt his downfall moment of
his in gameplay as well. After shooting another ballista you escort
Foltest deeper into the castle town and you would be forgiven if you didn't stop to take
in the sights so allow me to do so for you. This is one of a handful of times during the
Prologue that I was so impressed by how much work went into the environment—doubly so
because this a location that you barely spend any time in. Just like the sections of the city in Vizima,
this castle town feels like a real place, with the scale exactly right, that you are
only seeing a small slice of here. This begins a trend that continues with every
location in this game except for maybe Chapter Two. If you haven't played this game you should
know that Witcher 2 is much shorter than Witcher 1 if you only do one playthrough and maybe
even if you do two. There are three chapters instead of the five
that were in Witcher 1 and Chapter Three is really, really short. However some other sections, just like this
Prologue, have much more meat to them. Up next Foltest says a great line: and this is where I started to question if I should really like this King seeing as how rabid and fanatical his men get whenever he's around. There's something disturbing about how roaring
and rambunctious everyone becomes after the ride over. This isn't criticism—from my sheltered life
I'm going to guess that having to kill or be killed can do this to people. But it's disturbing to witness regardless. This section ends with what I think is the
most important Impactful Decision in the game: whether you kill Aryan La Valette or convince
him to surrender. Aryan is Maria's full grown son and much older
half-brother to Foltest's two bastard children. If he lives then he can be found being tortured
in the prison during your escape after your talk with Roche. If he's killed then Maria will be here instead. There are minor story differences from this
decision—they even reach into Witcher 3 although they don't change much. But I'm not exaggerating when I say this could
be the most important decision of the game because if Aryan lives then you don't get
to see Maria's boobies. I'm kidding (I mean it's true I am certain
someone out there has reloaded a save for this very reason and is hopefully ashamed
of themselves). But the real reason this matters so much is
that if you help him escape, you get one of the many hidden perks in the game. The best one in my opinion because it grants
50 extra weight to your carry capacity. Witcher 2 is the worst game (in this series)
for stupid inventory limits. You don't actually need to pick up much of
anything but you won't know that your first time through. Then on Dark Mode you are heavily encouraged
to collect tons of resources to craft a special set of weapons and armor to keep up with the
heightened difficulty—which again isn't actually necessary if you explore enough but
it's still a goal to work toward. If anything the first set of this unique Dark
Mode gear is overkill for the most of the game but we'll get to combat later, I promise. I also want to point out real quick that the
Dark Mode sets cause this overbearing monochrome shadow layer to appear on the screen during
fighting—so if you see it in some of the footage that's why it's there. It's meant to represent the cursed nature
of these items you have crafted and that their power is barely being contained by the full
set—if you try to wield these weapons without a complete collection Geralt's life will be
drained away. That idea is fine but I hate this visual effect
so much. It makes things hard to see and while that
definitely lives up to the mode's name I'll be using footage from that run sparingly because
of how murky it looks. It's like you're permanently stuck in a flashback
sequence. It's useless. All of these raw materials take up inventory
carry capacity and can fill you up after a dozen or so crates. So can weapons and armor you loot for selling
to merchants. Just like in the first game you can pillage
everyone's homes without them ever batting an eye and this is even required to be able
to craft the Dark Mode gear sets. When over-encumbered Geralt is limited to
a slow walk and so you will learn quickly that managing your inventory is a major part
of the game. At least your first time through and then
your first time through again on Dark Mode. This 50 extra carry weight goes a long way
to mitigate this issue and therefore it is one of the most important decisions in the
game and it's worth giving up the boobies. Once again, as briefly as possible—inventory
limitations need a reason to exist. Nothing is gained from this system. There's no challenge and realism/immersion
was lost at around one third of this carry capacity. The only outcome of this system is frustrating
the player. Speaking of frustration this carry weight
perk that you get from this choice is tucked away in a hidden menu off the skill tree screen. This starts out empty but will fill up with
secret perks—ones that the game doesn't tell you about when you receive them. Having brought up secrets I also feel compelled
to say that there will be no lies in this video. Like the fake romance cards in the first one
and the fakeout I did with the ending—there are no lies or misdirection in this video,
I promise. Pinky swear. There are about thirty of these secret perks. Most of them aren't from choices though. In fact they're more like hidden achievements
with rewards, like a fairly high backstab damage bonus if you inspect the corpse of
the Assassin's Creed easter egg in this starting area. I really like these kinds of hidden perks
in games, I just wish getting them in Witcher 2 was announced to you—in fact I'm certain
at least one person watching this will have played this game and not known about these
hidden perks until right now. Not notifying the player when you get a hidden
perk is not only confusing but it also robs you of the sense of accomplishment. You may never learn that you get some of these
from exploring, trying things out, and inspecting some areas—you check the menu later and
think “how did I get these? Did I even notice I had them? And if I didn't notice are they really that
impactful or important?” whereas they could have been strong incentives
to explore and experiment if they were given to you with some amount of ceremony. Like just imagine playing... Doom Eternal and just getting upgrades without
ever being told or notified or—anything. That's part of the game—is finding that
and being like “yeah! I have this bonus now, I'm gonna go search
for more of them!” Witcher 2 has a system like that and it doesn't
tell you! It is possible that the game isn't meant to
work this way. It's meant to display a notification when
you get these but it's not working. Case in point, when you hand in a quest you
may think that the game doesn't display what reward you received. This annoyed the shit out of me because I
didn't know how many orens I was getting for turning in tasks. Then I watched the footage back and it's there. The rewards always show up on the screen. Except only for 15 frames—a quarter of a
second. And for some of those frames the text isn't
100% clear. What's that about? How does that happen? It's burnt. Are you starting to see what I mean? The next section has Roche show up in the
flashback... that you're telling to Roche. Which is kind of weird seeing as Geralt is
meant to be explaining his version of events, but it makes sense since they quickly split
up and they're also reassuring each other that, yes, neither of them are crazy—a dragon
really did show up and attack them. When I first played the game at release I
died here so many times because I didn't understand what the game wanted from me. The fire still visibly shoots through the
wooden coverings here and then it chucks combat at you at the same time. Now I know just to run through, and I enjoy
the dialogue that happens during this, but it is one of many ways that the game communicates
poorly with the player at the most crucial point of the game's teaching period—the
opening. Triss's attitude to the dragon is worth noting
and it's a good way to talk about how different she is in this game from the first one. She's amazed and almost happy about seeing
it. She's also much warmer to Geralt in the tent
scene, reminding him that Foltest is his King but also that she's on the witcher's side
more than the monarch's. Triss is a vastly better character in the
sequel and acts much more like her character from the books. I don't necessarily think the change in voice
actress is a big part of it although she does an excellent job—it's the change in direction
and how the character is now written. Put simply: she's no longer pretending to
be Yennefer. It's a big improvement and a welcome part
of the game. I can't say the same positive things about
the dragon. I don't think these visuals have aged well
and the awkward Quick-Time-Event interactions certainly don't help. The second attack later is the worst of the
two and it just looks awful. I'm sorry, it just does, like Geralt and Foltest
are being attacked by an action figure dragon that's being stiffly operated by invisible
hands. The Quick-Time prompts also blend in too well
on the screen and this is far from the only time in the game that I have trouble seeing
them. However I do want to point out the alternative
possibility that they're just poorly placed on the screen. There's always some action going on when these
show up and your eyes aren't drawn enough away to see them. At the end of this Geralt loses his sword
when he rams it into the roof of the dragon's mouth. This would have been another great way to
justify why he loses his super powerful silver sword but nope. If you have Aerondight from the first game,
gifted to you by The Lady of the Lake, then at the end of this scene it teleports back
to your hand after being thrust into the dragon like it's Mjolnir. If you have no sword on you at all then another
also materializes in your hand and the sheathe on your back. Witcher 2 has more of this type of awkwardness
than the first game if you haven't picked up on that already. It's a symptom of ambition and I probably
wouldn't want it any other way. We're getting ahead of ourselves though because
this second dragon attack comes right before the end of this retelling to Roche. The largest section of the Prologue is sandwiched
between this and where we just were in the story. Roche is going off to torture someone into
opening the gate into the castle's main area where Foltest's children are being kept. The King expects that Roche will go too far
and kill his subject before getting the info as he has many times before, and so tasks
Geralt with looking for another way in. And that's exactly what happens. Roche is quite the screw up and I wonder if
that's intentional—I like the character regardless but seeing him mess up became a
running joke for me across all the chapters and I'll be sure to point out all those instances
as we get to them. So far these sections have introduced you
to a core component of Witcher's gameplay and story: characters have their debut. So have the concepts of magic and monsters. You can try some of the mini-games. You've been given some areas to wander around
and explore. Quick-Time-Events have been poorly brought
to your attention. And you've already made an important choice
or two, probably without realizing it. It's for this reason that I'm surprised you
can choose to do this monastery section before the others because it's a repeat of most of
these lessons. You have a much more complicated area to explore
with many hidden paths—but still more contained than the rest of the game so it remains a
learning experience. There are fights against both humans and monster
enemies. Lots of containers to loot, NPCs to speak
to, and even some choices. Foltest's men are harassing the locals even
after they've surrendered and you can either ignore it, intervene on the peasant's behalf,
or fight off the soldiers and then extort the people yourself—which is possibly the
only choice in the entire series that I feel is out of character for Geralt and breaks
the rule of “every choice is one Geralt would consider and you cause him to lean toward
one”. Although there are a handful in Witcher 3
that I think are questionable as well. If you selflessly help these peasants then
they'll show up in Chapter One and give you a reward. This section of the prologue is also the first
time that you use conversation skills—there are three. Persuade, Intimidate, and Axii—which is
the Star Wars force hand wave that was absent from conversations in the first game. I thought for sure that this change to Axii
was to gamify the ability to be used in conversations in a way that's stark change from the first
game and the books. But no this is actually how it's used in Sapkowski's
stories too, although very rarely, and it's Witcher 1 that's the odd one out from other
games and those stories. This flooded dungeon area has walls you can
break down with aard, which is a good way to point out that it's no longer a force area
of effect and is instead a projectile ball of wind—like a different element of igni,
really. This is where Witcher 2 is the odd one out
and the only game that has these changes. They're back to being cone effects in Witcher
3, which I think feels much better to use. You also see the elfish terrorists the Scoia'tael
for the first time after getting out of this dungeon, which both Geralt and Roche have
a history with. Roche leads a special forces group that sometimes
ruthlessly attacks Scoia'tael commandos. Curiously, even if you've imported a save
Roche doesn't comment on the choices Geralt made regarding the Scoia'tael in Witcher 1—which
is where in my playthrough that I started to get worried about how continuity was going
to be handled. Last on our tour of La Valette Castle before
Foltest dies is this fight in the courtyard, which functions as the Prologue's mini-boss
conclusion for combat, and meeting with the priest inside the monastery. There's another man in here named Tailles
who has a scar across his face from the first time he met Geralt—in the books. Tailles also comes back in Blood and Wine
and it's one of a few instances of book characters showing up for what feels like the pure bullshittery
of it. I don't know how I feel about stuff like this
and writing this script certainly hasn't helped at all. They can be fun “ah ha that character is
from the book!” moments but it often feels so unlikely that all of these book characters,
in stories that span over several different countries and time periods, keep running into
each other. It's a cool Sonic the Hedgehog reference though. Even weirder is using Axii on the priest. This next sentence is 100% true: I have never
seen this axii check succeed, nor have I ever seen it fail. How can this be? Well it shows up as “Axii Hex Failed!”
every time I'm here, and yet it never actually fails. This is not the only time in the game that
this can happen and I'm just dumbfounded about this. There's so much of this type of thing in this
game that I'm actually excited to get to it but I don't want to overwhelm you this early
in the video—for now I just want to say that the UI feels like it's possessed and
does whatever the hell it feels like independent of what the inner-workings of the game decides. On top of this, hidden in that same Perk Page,
are your competency levels for these conversation skills, Axii included. If you succeed at a check you get a point
up to a maximum of three. Fail and you sometimes don't get a point. I guess the idea is that you're rewarded for
save scumming if you want to play it that way but that you can leave it to chance and
have a different playthrough wherein Geralt is terrible at conversation checks if your
dice rolls are unlucky—or hey maybe you still succeed even if it shows as a failure. It just works. So the dragon attacks. Roche is nearly killed. Geralt loses his sword and then it comes back
like a silver boomerang. And the King is grateful for what is the third
time now that Geralt saved his life. In return he asks that he is released from
his duty as the royal bodyguard and that Triss is allowed to leave with him. Foltest reluctantly agrees, points out that
Triss is madly in love with Geralt and would follow him anywhere, and then goes upstairs
to see his children. They're being watched over by a blind monk. This is actually Letho, although you don't
learn his name until a while later. He's another witcher from a different school
and he is not blind at all. He's impersonating a monk, hoping to have
a chance to use it to kill Foltest. Which luckily for him happens. Unluckily, Geralt is here too. He's not perceptive enough to save Foltest
but he is quick enough to try to attack Letho afterward. I like the small touch that is Letho guiding
the children away before he kills their father—he isn't the kind of Saturday Morning Cartoon
Villain that we saw in Witcher 1's opening. Unfortunately Anais, the older of the two
royal bastards, comes back too soon and sees most of it anyway. Including Geralt's charge at Letho which only
incriminates him more when he's found with his sword drawn over the King's body, after
Letho dives out a window to the Scoia'tael waiting in a boat in the water to carry him
away. For whatever reason Letho and the Scoia'tael
are working together. Another d'hoine bites the dust. This is somewhat similar to the opening cinematic—which
wasn't included in the initial release of the game. My memory is clearly starting to suffer as
I get older because I could have sworn I watched this before I played Witcher 2 but nope, it
was part of the later Enhanced Edition update. So imagine how much more confusing this story
must have been at release for people, when they didn't have this cinematic to introduce
them to Letho, or that someone was going around killing kings. Not that the title hides that or anything
but I think you know what I mean. This is one of my favorite video game cinematics
because it's just so brutal. It also shows how rulers are dependent on
their court sorcerers for protection, and how lethal an accomplished witcher can be. This head belonged to the the ruler of Aedirn—King
Demavend, who shows up briefly in Thronebreaker. With Foltest added to his kill list, Letho
has removed two rulers in the Northern Realms. Roche believes Geralt's story. You may rightfully wonder why they don't ask
Anais to reveal the truth—they do, but it happens much later. A great amount of chaos is unleashed in the
wake of the King's death and many powerful families are fighting for control of the Kingdom. Geralt the Kingslayer is a great scapegoat
to appease some factions. As Roche says, with a line that shows the
high quality of this game's writing: After this retelling of the day, Roche wants
to enlist Geralt's help to find the real Kingslayer but he doesn't want to outright ask him. Unexpectedly you can refuse to do so and bait
more information out of Roche, and even get killed if you push too far—Ves, Roche's
right hand, will come in and shoot Geralt if you try to attack him. I like that this is an option and it also
teaches you to be careful with certain choices in high stakes situations—however I do have
to point out that there are plenty of times that you are in a dangerous spot and can say
whatever you like with no repercussions, so you seldom have to worry about these pitfalls. I also prefer how this is handled in Chapter
Three, where certain choices make Geralt “flash forward” in his mind and he foresees his
death and so refuses to say something after you chose it. You still get the death and the choice of
something you want to say, but without the hassle of reloading. You have to agree to work with Roche. At least for now. In return you are provided the means to escape,
are instructed to do it quietly, and given information about Geralt's death from a file
on him kept by Temerian Intelligence. Geralt was apparently killed in the middle
of a pogrom in the city of Rivia. He was trying to defend non-humans from the
racist rioters when a random nobody in the crowd, after being spared by Geralt, stabbed
him in the stomach with a pitchfork. I believe this is also the very first time
the games mention Yennefer by name. She has been brought up before but as a no-name
sorceress. Aside from Dandelion in one of the optional
adventure modules in Witcher 1 which is based a long time before the events of the first
game. Yennefer also allegedly died with Geralt on
that same day in Rivia. To avoid some confusion in the future—this
isn't why he's called Geralt of Rivia by the way. He's not actually from Rivia. It's a whole other thing that we'll get to. Learning all of this from Roche triggers Geralt
to begin to regain his memories. Although that's not exactly true. Memory is a funny thing and so I think it's
okay that there isn't a precise point at which it starts to return. Some memories were already breaking through
in the first game. Later on in this sequel Geralt is told that
purging a specific curse will cause his memories to return. At another point he says that killing the
King of the Wild Hunt at the end of Witcher 1 has caused it to happen. To me it seems like most of his memories return
when he finally gets to speak to Letho privately. Although if that's a coincidence after all
of these events, or Letho gave his memory the final jog it needed to come back, remains
unclear. Enough of that for now though. Although I do want to comment on the presentation
of this memory recall. There are a few of these graphic novel style
sections and I don't like them. This is way more subjective than usual I know
but there's something grotesque about this art-style that I dislike. It feels like it's going out of its way to
be abrasive and ugly and while the world of the witcher definitely has its rough and gritty
side, I don't think this is a good match even though it's well illustrated. The art style they went with in Witcher 3
and Thronebreaker is a much better fit in my opinion. As always my artistic ability is as developed
as Todd Howard's honesty so you should take this with a pinch of salt and I won't mention
it again. So we're done with the Prologue and the Tutorial
now right? Not quite. First we're introduced to the new fist fighting
mini-game which is now just a bog standard QTE—a real shame. And then there's the first stealth section. I feel like the games often forget about Geralt's
witcher signs when he's captured like this. His hands should be more carefully bound or
his fingers broken. I'd accept it as an oversight or just that
he can't use signs when his hands are tied but in Chapter Three you have to burn your
binds off in a section just like this or else you'll die. I dislike that the games just wave these signs
away and then back again depending on if the story needs it or not. You can use signs once you're free. Extinguish torches. Ignite torches. I appreciate the idea but this just made it
awkward to use things in this area since Geralt would throw signs out if I tried to click
on something when too close to a torch. You can stealth through here as carefully
as you like—which for me means not at all since I hate stealth in games that aren't
built around it. Side-gameplay systems like this are rarely
developed enough to be enjoyable and Witcher 2 is no exception. This area is fairly large too with many cells
and NPC conversations to overhear. It's also where I started to realize that
CD Projekt wants to emulate Blizzard Entertainment a little bit. We already saw that Assassin's Creed reference
earlier. In here there's a Prison Break reference with
an inmate purposefully getting himself incarcerated after having the layout of the prison tattooed
on his ass—which his fellow criminals are angry about since he'll have to drop his trousers
every time they want to look at the map. There are so many more weird pop culture references
in the games from now on and some of them are quite intrusive. Sorry to say I'm not the biggest fan of them
since the games already take place in a world steeped in so many fairytales—many feel
forced and out of place.
And with the way the Conjunction of Spheres works it makes a lot of them kind of awkward. Are they meant to just be a reference to real
world stuff that we've made? Or are they actual ties to those fictional
universes? Sometimes it feels like they are. They are real world ties to beliefs and some
fiction that has been created by us that has been passed down through the humans in this
world. And other times it's clearly not—they're
just fun easter eggs. The problem is it's hard to tell which is
which and sometimes it's just a reference for the sake of a reference—and I don't
know. Let's move on. If you killed Aryan then you can find Maria
Louisa La Valette being tortured. Or you can skip this torture chamber entirely
and meet up with her afterward since Shilard saves her if you don't. He was the Nilfgaardian speaking to Foltest
if you've forgotten. He wants to sign a treaty with her and she
clearly doesn't want to, but because Geralt killed her son and the castle town has fallen
she feels like she has no choice but to make a deal with the Nilfgaardian devil. She asks you how her son died and you can
tell her without any pain, which she accepts with a surprising amount of dignity. Shilard then gives a half-ass attempt at helping
you escape. If you don't kill Aryan then he is being tortured
and there's no sign of Shilard. Given the events of Witcher 3 I think it's
safe to assume that he still goes to Maria Louisa during these moments wherever she happens
to be outside of the dungeon. Instead of a secret meeting to form any alliances,
Aryan sets the place on fire and then dies. Now this has the hilarious unintended side-effect
of making Roche look like an idiot. On my first playthrough I stormed through
this place killing most of the guards instead of stealthing. Before sailing away, Roche admonished me for
raising such a ruckus. On my second playthrough I was careful to
stealth through to see how Roche would react to that—but this was also the playthrough
in which I saved Aryan. So he commends you for being quiet right after
exclaiming about the castle being on fire. Triss is also here because power in Temeria
has been decentralized and so they have no need to tolerate the presence of an appointed
sorceress for protection—not yet anyway—and have every reason to cast her out until a
new ruler is settled upon. Plus many noble families want the country
to splinter into smaller Kingdoms now that the Foltest bloodline appears to have been
snuffed out for good. There's another dialogue choice here that
is so different than I expected it to be based on the preview. I thought this would be Geralt reassuring
and comforting Triss but instead it's condescending. But that's it for this point. I'll try not to bring this up again since
I think the problem is clear. At least for this video. It will rear its ambiguous head again in Witcher
3 though. Geralt asks Triss to heal some of his wounds
and says, because of the file on his death that Roche showed him, that they finally need
to have an open conversation about his past—including Yennefer. Including “the things you don't want to
tell me.” And that's the end of the Prologue. If we rewind though there's one final thing
to look at. Newboy in the Crinfrid Reavers. He thinks he might have a magical protective
amulet and wants your help as a witcher to determine if that's true. Turns out the amulet is magical but there's
no way to confirm if it's a help or a hindrance. You can convince Newboy to either: 1) trust in the magic and go into battle without
any armor in order to win a bet. 2) Not put any faith in the amulet at all
but to still keep it. or
3) Hand the amulet over to Geralt since it might be dangerous. Newboy will die if he goes into the fight
with just the amulet. If he survives then he will be guarding the
outside of the prison. He'll be grateful for your help and distract
the other guards in order for you to slip by—just be careful not to accidentally alert
them or else you'll have to kill Newboy here as well. If he dies in the battle for La Valette castle
then obviously he won't be here at all. Depending on what you choose you may have
the amulet at the end of this, which leads to a fairly substantial quest to cleanse it
of its curse—which currently presents itself as a -10% armor debuff while its in your possession
and becomes extra life regeneration after going through all of the trouble to cleanse
it in the next chapter with the help of a secret witch. If you don't get the amulet because you make
a different choice or you skip this conversation entirely then this quest is locked away from
you. For the rest of the playthrough. This willingness to divert the player away
from content, or toward different content, is the most impressive thing about Witcher
2. This ends up being a minor instance of it
compared to what comes up later. This is why this game is a nightmare to analyze
and requires so much recapping of events in order to discuss it. It'll be smooth sailing for a while at least
and it's not until the last third of Chapter One that things properly kick off. For now it's a relaxing journey away from
the gameplay learning experiences and story set up of La Valette Castle, to the initially
sleepy town of Flotsam. All the while Triss tells Geralt all about
his past toxic relationship with Yennefer of Vengerberg. We're overdue for a geography lesson. This is the map of the known witcher world;
known by us in the real world—civilization has spread all over this continent from what
I understand but the stories and games take place in only a small portion of it. More maps of the other regions exist within
the witcher world itself of course, like Zerrikania and Ofier, but this area is the only one we've
been shown so far. And from what I understand it there were no
maps at all until the games came out. The books had no map reference. This is Redania. This is Kaedwen. This is Aedirn. This is your card. And this is Temeria, where we've been for
both games so far. Save the Witcher 1 Prologue in Kaer Morhen
which is up here somewhere. There are other Kingdoms that are important
in the books and games—Kovir is mentioned a few times and a book character visits there
in The Tower of Swallows. The Norse-themed islands of Skellige are off
the west coast. There's Cintra, and Rivia. And farther south is the Empire of Nilfgaard. If you've played Blood and Wine then you know
Toussaint is down there too. It's unclear if this continent is the only
major landmass on this planet, or sphere as they would call it. There could be other continents that haven't
been discovered yet although that's doubtful. If there's ever a Witcher MMO though, count
on that happening for sure. From this point onward Witcher 2 takes place
in something called The Pontar Valley, a region that's name is linked chicken-or-the-egg style
with the Pontar River, which is what Geralt and company are sailing on at the moment. The river begins far in the east—from the
Blue Mountains I believe—and flows west to where it meets the ocean in Velen near
Novigrad. You can see this in Witcher 3 and it's an
important boundary in that game. In a similar way the Yaruga River serves as
an important landmark for the war that takes place in the books since, like the Pontar,
it's so wide that it doubles as both the border between regions and also a stopping point
for marching armies until the conditions are good enough for them to risk crossing. The Pontar Valley is a region in Northern
Aedirn which is vital for trade. At its western most point is a convergence
of all four borders of the major Northern Kingdoms. The land of the Pontar Valley is apparently
quite rich in fertility and raw resources too. King Demavend feverishly kept it under his
rule before he died, and King Henselt of Kaedwen has looked upon the lands with envy for what
seems like his entire rule. He briefly captured it during the war waged
in the books and almost nullified the entire peace treaty with Nilfgaard at the end of
that story in order to keep this land, but ultimately he let it go. Now that Demavend is Deadavend, Henselt is
back at it again. It's a cool knock on effect and thoughtful
continuity from the books. Here he goes invading again. The reason I'm taking the time to meticulously
point all of this out is that it's not made clear enough where all of this is in the games. The map isn't in English and it doesn't put
a marker for where you currently are. And if I remember correctly these branching
cinematics with the boat sailing up the river weren't in the original release of the game
so it was even more confusing back then than it is now. Naturally the meeting point of many Kingdoms,
when combined with a very large river that runs between many regions, is going to become
a hot spot for trade. This is where Flotsam is located. The setting of Chapter One and where many
trading ships have to stop while they transport goods up and down the Pontar River. Before we get to explore Flotsam we first
have to be welcomed by both the Scoia'tael and the local authority. Iorveth is the leader of this area's elfish
commando unit and they've decided to terrorize Flotsam. In a flashback you learn that Letho seems
to be working with them. In another conversation that Geralt does not
hear you also find out that Letho and Geralt know each other. Geralt just can't remember. Letho is not a character from the books, he
is a wholly new creation by CD Projekt, and this line “I know his weakness” seems
incredibly loaded and important. We'll have to wait and see what it means. I have tons to say about Iorveth but we need
to see more of him first and don't worry we will because he's the counterpart to Roche
in this game. If you watched the first video then you can
think of Roche as a much more... bristly version of Siegfried. Where you can think of Iorveth as a much more
extremist version of Yaevinn—although a much more developed version of him as well
in my view. What I do want to point out is the very hard
to see timer that appears in this conversation choice. Surprise! Some of these decisions are timed and you
may not realize what that means before this one runs out. Or you may not see the timer at all and think
that the game glitched out and just chose one of these options for you. I don't feel strongly about the timed choices
I just wish the icon was easier to see and that the duration on this first one was tripled
since it's your first time seeing it. Roche and Iorveth taunt each other seeing
as they have diametrically opposed ideologies and stations in life—Iorveth has also killed
many spies that were under Roche's command and in the service of the other human kingdoms. Meanwhile Roche's Blue Stripes Special Forces
unit have murdered enough elves to forever cancel Christmas. Triss saves the day by creating a magical
dome that deflects the arrows of the Scoia'tael ambush but also half-faints while doing so. Some people propose that this happens because
she's allergic to magic, which is one of those weirdly specific details that's brought up
but is never important. In the books it's to explain why she can't
have some deep scarring on her chest magically healed but in the games a way to do this has
clearly been found or retconned to have never happened. This instance of fainting is the only time
it ever happens and she channels far more magic than this in other scenes before and
after this so I'm not sure why this time is special. Maybe it's because she had to cast the spell
so quickly with no warning—which I don't quite believe because she knew Iorveth could
be trouble the moment they got here. It could also be that CD Projekt just wanted
an excuse to get the group into Flotsam quickly without you wandering around first, or Triss
turning it into a big back and forth battle, or just to have this line about her ass. In Flotsam proper you're still not free to explore yet. Roche makes more of an ass of himself than
the one he was just holding by claiming to be a spice merchant:
And then you go to the city's main square to discover that an execution ceremony is
currently being carried out. In what is the game's biggest coincidence,
Dandelion and Zoltan are also in Flotsam. They have arrived here entirely independently
of Geralt and Triss. They're here for their own reasons and have
gotten in so much trouble that they're about to be Jeffrey Epstein'd for it. You save them both and are introduced to Bernard
Loredo for your trouble. This is the commandant of Flotsam and his
first appearance shows the strength of CD Projekt's writing and presentation. This sort of thing doesn't usually happen in games, especially in big RPGs, since voice
lines are typically recorded separately. Actors cannot as easily react and play off
of the performance of other actors as they can when on stage or filming a scene. I don't know if CD Projekt did group recording
sessions or had the foresight to include directions for their voice actors for little details
like this. The result is surprisingly effective for what's
such a little difference. Many of the conversations, especially early
in the game, have this high attention to detail and direction. There's even another great one in this scene
when two people in the audience start to argue with a guard about the respectability of being
a prostitute. There's simply a great flow to most of these
conversations instead of lines being formally read aloud at each other, using the characters
as performance puppets. And if there's anything I know in this world,
it's bad voice over work. Now you're free to explore and this is finally when the game returns to the fundamental structure
of the series. If you're playing through all the witcher
games in order then you haven't been let loose like this since Lakeside. This is a large area with a safe zone full
of NPCs to speak to and collect quests from, with a separate large hostile area to explore
full of monsters, bandits, and objectives for most of those quests. There's a blacksmith to upgrade your equipment. Characters to play dice with, along with the
other mini-games. Major quests to advance. Women to sleep with. And loot to slow walk back to your stash. But this same structure isn't where the similarities
with the first game come to an end. As we remember, the Outskirts in Chapter One
of Witcher 1 was a horrible place with many despicable people in it—although not all
of them. They had a monster problem and there was a
group of Scoia'tael nearby. Importantly, it was also in a bad state before
Geralt arrived—it was already a tragic place to live. And that's exactly how Flotsam is also in
the first chapter of Witcher 2. I don't think the conclusion of this story
is as strong as the decision you make between Abigail and the Villagers in the first game,
but in every other way this opening chapter is far more developed and dense with details. I really mean it. Flotsam is one of my favorite locations in
any fantasy RPG. The witcher series has quite a few locations
that stand out like that for me actually. There is something so memorable and real about
this place. It was another time these first two games
made me stop in awe at the boundary of the play area and long so badly to keep going,
keep exploring. Just like the edges of the map in Hollow Knight
and you probably know how much I love that game. “Is Witcher 3 really going to live up to
that?” I hoped secretly. The scale of it is what I appreciate the most. In many other games villages feel like a bunch
of houses plopped down at some point in the road. Someone drew a grid over the map and then
connected lines from major places to visit and calculated where there should be some
small settlements to fill in the gaps. That's how these places came to be. Mathematically. Part of the wilderness was cleared with land
editing tools, the terrain was artificially flattened, and here are some houses and a
tavern and some NPCs. In comparison, the area where Flotsam is feels
like it existed in this world long, long before humans came here and erected these walls and
vomited up these piers. Look at the dense canopy of giant trees overhead. How the untamed forest starts mere steps from
the gates and is even rougher and more unruly than the uneven streets behind the walls. There's a great use of verticality in the
entire area like everything was built around the land instead of the land being shaped
around the play area—and consideration was taken to how people may build their own vertical
structures, lookouts, and shortcuts to accommodate all these problems in the area that are too
big to change. You can also more seamlessly explore it too
with lower load times at the cost of some performance hiccups and strategically placed
doors. Outside of those checkpoints each of the major
sections of this place are blissfully open with many ways to get around. There's no need to bring Geralt back on his
Go-Kart, sorry. There are several linear “one-way” routes
to side areas though that require backtracking out of them. Thankfully you don't have to visit most of
these areas multiple times—except for one. This place is introduced with the rules involved
in living here. Elves are so much more in tune with the forests
than humans and yet even Iorveth, when trying to reach his hideout which he presumably comes
and goes from all the time, has to use a smaller monster called a nekker as a lure to make
the trip a safe one. There are sentries standing guard at every
door and archers at the ready meters from where the forest meets Flotsam's own small
outskirts section—and they're there day and night because people would die if they
weren't. There's an ecosystem here. One in the forest with the animals, the small
monsters, the big monsters, and the elves. One in the village with the peasants, the
non-humans, the prostitutes, and the commandant's goons. And the larger interaction between these two
separate systems clashing as they struggle to co-exist. Then there are the ruins in the forest. The totems that seem even older than those. The broken bridge and the alcoholic troll
that tends to it. Do you see how all this even matches one of
the main themes and conflicts of the games? The contradictory savage serenity of this
forest and the elves that live in it, versus the disgusting industry that the conquering
humans have brought here, scarring the beauty of the land but still making it safer here
on average than what it was before. At least it would be if it weren't for the
Scoia'tael that are harassing the humans but that could still be seen as another way that
nature is responding and trying to balance the human progress in this area. Even the giant monster that is upsetting the
balance of this region is man-made—not elf-made. This huge Kraken-like creature with that name
morphed into The Kayran. Created by a mage and grown and mutated over
the years. This isn't the same kind of fairytale melting
pot atmosphere of the first game, although there is some of it present. Flotsam is like the opposite of Lakeside. It's bleaker and far more gritty, just like
the forest is brighter and far more gorgeous—even as both are equally dangerous. Just for different reasons. This is a place where this planet's immune
system is at odds with the human invaders, whereas Lakeside was in harmony. I really like how much range this series and
its setting has. It's another way that the witcher world stands
out—the variety it can have and still feel like it's a part that belongs to a cohesive
whole. Side-quests and side-characters here are the
same way and continue their great qualities from the first game. Some of them become relevant to the main quest
in unexpected ways: such as investigating the haunted ruins of the asylum, the elf lamenting
the loss of his love that's gone missing, the madam of the brothel, and even the fistfighting
mini-game quest. There's also a quest that ends up linking
back to Salamandra from Witcher 1. The game benefits so much from exploring questions
like: “How would people survive here? What problems would they have? Where would they be getting supplies from? What would they be trying to do and how can
the player be involved in that?” Because of this even quests like solving the
troll's drinking problem feel like a part of the main experience even though it isn't,
because the line between main and side content becomes so blurry—like the drunk troll's
vision. The multiple stages of these quests also contributes
to this quality because little of it feels half-assed or lesser than the main stuff. Even a simple and seemingly straightforward
quest to get an incense recipe for someone. You meet the guy, learn that the incense that
another shopkeeper is selling might harmful, agree to try to get the formula for some money,
and either convince that shopkeeper or threaten him or get a fake formula to fool the buyer
if you're convinced that the incense isn't all that dangerous. Then you can refuse to hand over the formula
without payment because the buyer wants to test its legitimacy first which also has a
choice: do you allow yourself to be blindfolded and led to his hideout or do you steadfastly
refuse—something that in most games would just mean that the quest ends but no the game
has accounted for the player being stubborn. Taking the blindfold of course leads to you
being captured and you have to fight your way out. Making your own way to the cave means you
get to start the fight on your own terms or accept the reward if you got the genuine formula
and decide not to pick at their past work with Salamandra. At the asylum two men are here looking for
a lead on some treasure. Inside you learn that they were involved in
the past crimes committed at this place and directly linked to why it's now cursed. There are wraiths to fight here, journals
to find and read, fiery secret passages, insane scribblings on the walls, and some important
information on The Wild Hunt—about which Geralt is becoming more and more convinced
that he was kidnapped by and that's why he lost his memory. You calm one of the men down with some of
the same drugs they used to force on patients—some great irony there but also a case where the
game forgets about axii—and learn about how they tortured information out of a patient
among other horribly questionable practices. The prime specter of one of the men that they
tortured demands vengeance before he'll disentangle himself from haunting the site and you can
either lure the guilty men back to be killed by the specter, try to trick him with the
eyes and hearts from a monster or pigs (which never works despite what the wiki says cause
the wiki is wrong because that made it so much easier to make this video thank you so
much for being wrong about so many things wiki), or kill the ghost yourself. If you choose this last option then you have
the further choice of letting the two men go or turning them in at Loredo's manor for
punishment. Either way you can make the connection now,
or later when you explore the manor, that Loredo's mother was a patient at the asylum
and hasn't fully recovered from the ailments that had her committed there. And considering all the information that you
can find at the asylum it brings up quite a few uncomfortable facts that the game never
addresses, and you're left to think about them by yourself. Considering the amount of torture that the
patients were put through it's not that much of a stretch to propose that one of those
torturers might be Loredo's father. And the reason that Loredo grew up to be such
a monster is directly linked to his mother's disposition and how she has treated the world
and everyone else that lives in after what she was put through. It doesn't excuse any of their actions of
course but it does bring them back under the idea that the world makes its own monsters
and makes them slightly more sympathetic. Just slightly. She's still clearly unstable and part of her
has never left that asylum. Depending on your choices you might kill this
woman later on the main quest. But this whole thing about her and Loredo
and the asylum and what we just went through? This is a side-quest. The troll is drinking himself to death because
someone killed his troll wife and cut off her head. This starts with a short investigation to
the bridge, fighting the troll into submission, and then deciding to listen to his story or
just killing him. There's a contract in town for the troll's
life since he no longer repairs the bridge and attacks anyone that comes close—meanwhile
the people in the outskirts like the troll and appreciated his masonry and so they want
you to solve the troll's depression, not kill him. This leads you to search for those responsible
for killing the troll's mate by either asking around or searching homes for the she-troll's
head that's been mounted as a trophy. You can play dice for this to give it back
to the drunk troll but it's not enough and also kind of terrifying so I'm not surprised
he doesn't accept it as a job well done. He wants you to enact revenge for him and
so you follow a lead to the tavern and then to the cemetery to fight the group of thugs
responsible for the crime led by a man named Dmitri, who does dirty work for Loredo. The troll can finally stop drinking after
this and resumes his bridge work. Near this bridge there's an elf woman being harassed by the guards—she's helpless to
their accusations that she's tempting men with sex and then luring them away to be killed. You can agree to investigate at the cave where
the guards claim she takes her victims and they all wait outside while you go in. Surprisingly it turns out Loredo's men aren't
just racist toward elves—they're racist and correct. She is luring people here for Scoia'tael archers
to kill them. You can decide to turn her in or lie on her
behalf to spare her from what will probably be a cruel punishment—since Geralt has no
idea if she's being forced into acting as bait or not. She might not deserve this punishment and
she's certainly not going to get a fair trial. She agrees to meet you somewhere after this
if you let her go but it's another trap. A Scoia'tael ambush attacks and the woman
runs away. After you kill the elves you can track her
down and either let her go a second time, take her to the guards, or kill her yourself. This is another quest that expands upon the
conflict between the humans and the Scoia'tael with a conclusion that's difficult to morally
digest. Yes the guards are racist toward the elves
and there's no authority that can help them so they have to take matters into their own
hands, but as we just saw they show no hesitation when also killing people who help them, never
mind those who passively do them no favors but also no harm. There's a genocidal endgame here for the Scoia'tael
which is very much in line with the history of the elves on this planet, and almost every
other planet that they've been to as well. In the lower level of the tavern there's a
combined dice room and fight club. It's also right next to the brothel, although
they use a room on the upper floor as well. There's some really great dialogue here. The prostitutes talking about doing it “witcher
and striga style” which is a cool way that the Kingdom's legends can be morphed into
jokes—not by the game's writers alone, but by them adopting what it would be like for
the common folk living in this world. And the legends and jokes they would create
about big events. Then there's the funny lines about the opponents
you face in the fistfighting mini-game, which are so entertaining that they almost make
up for how boring this QTE “challenge” is. Surprisingly this feeds into the main quest
too. Or maybe unsurprisingly if you're just watching
the video considering that's what this whole section is about. Anyway! Win enough matches and someone named King
Ziggy will approach you to become your coach or promoter. I always took this to be a reference to Don
King but it could be a coincidence. Following this guy's lead can take you to
Loredo's mansion before you go there with Roche for the main quest. The commandant has his own fistfighting arena
and, after a few more matches including the return of Zdenek from Witcher 1, Loredo orders
you to take a dive in return for a larger split of the winnings. This is one choice I've never done because
I hate Loredo so much so I have no idea if this leads to something different happening
later or if he tricks you and doesn't give you an increased percentage of the winnings. And I would go on the wiki to check but...
it lies. I always win and piss him off, and then kill
the goons he sends after me in the streets for revenge. I don't want to go through every side-quest
in every chapter because it would take too long and, as you can see from the length of
this video, being as succinct as possible is really important to me. Plus Witcher 3 is the only game that will
get all-quests treatment just like I did with the shrines in Breath of the Wild. But I think this was enough to demonstrate
how well integrated these are into the setting and the story of Witcher 2. The main quest stuff feels different. Like progress is happening because your actions
are forcing reactions out of the major characters in the area. Sile de Tansarville, whose name doesn't look
like it should be pronounced Sheila at all but it is, is a sorceress from Kovir who just
so happens to be in Flotsam right now. She's hunting the Kayran and requests Geralt's
help for doing so. Sile ends up being another important character
in the story but it's not a coincidence that she's in this area at the same time as you
and Dandelion and Zoltan and all the rest of the Scooby Gang—although it will definitely
appear that way at first. Helping her kill the Kayran is one of the
first two stages of the main quest here—along with visiting Loredo with Roche in the evening—and
it's not until you've completed both that Triss decides she's gotten a feel of the area
and isn't interrupting your work with her theory of how to find Letho. The trip with Roche is awkward. Temeria technically rules in Flotsam but Loredo
isn't forthcoming with recognizing Roche's authority as a high commander in the Temerian
military—one that far outranks him. This is for many reasons but the one that's
clear right now is that the country is in chaos after Foltest's death. As an aside here, it's a bit of a plot hole
that most people are only just learning about Demavend's death now. That King lost his head at least four months
ago and while I am willing to accept that most people in Vizima haven't heard about
it, Flotsam is a major trade hub that has people coming and going from many different
Kingdoms; Demavend was killed early into Witcher 1 in terms of time. Probably around when Geralt gets thrown in
prison at the end of Chapter One or at some point in Chapter Two. Yet most people in Flotsam are only learning
about it now, along with the news that freshly killed Foltest is also gone at the exact same
time. You have to sabotage a ballista while waiting
for Loredo to be ready to meet with you which is something I don't think ever comes back
up again. Weird. There's some arm wrestling to do here. And then a shitty stealth sequence. If you fail then you have to pass it off as
a stupid mistake which Loredo doesn't believe but he still works with you. If you succeed then you get to overhear his
conversation with Sile and get a much better idea of the wealth that Loredo is siphoning
off of the traders that come through his town—traders that are currently stuck because of the Kayran's
activities. Fighting that Kayran is the closest the games
ever get to the Witcher 1's opening cinematic. There are multiple stages of preparation and
research that are part of the main quest. Smaller monster contracts can still require
the same thing—buying books to learn how to permanently end the problem, like bombing
a nekker nest or smashing giant insect cocoons to make the laying queens spawn so you can
kill them. But instead of traditional books you can kindle
Geralt's memory by simply killing enough of the monsters so that the knowledge comes back
to him. I am going to be perhaps a little too honest
right now and say that this is the exact type of thing that I would complain about no matter
what. I dislike the fact that research isn't the
only way to do this. But I can admit that if it was I might be
saying right now “wouldn't it be cool if you could make Geralt relearn his past experiences
by fighting these monsters enough and do it that way as another method of incorporating
his amnesia into gameplay blah blah blah blah”. So I think the problem here is more that you're
not allowed to experiment for yourself outside of these two paths and that the poor combat
further drags this down. See I found a way to complain anyway. The Kayran contract is no different. You travel with Triss to find more information
about it, meeting the drunk elf Cedric and his friend in the process. Triss uses a spell to divine that the Kayran
has cancer and will be dead in a few years, but unfortunately still needs to be dealt
with sooner than that. From here you have the option to build a trap
to use in the fight, find a special ingredient to make a potion that grants immunity to the
Kayran's poison, and check back with Sile for more information or to let her know that
you're ready to battle. You can also brew other potions if you think
they'll help. So let's use this to return to the point from
the first video about the witcher fantasy—acting like a witcher and everything that comes with
it—how it's gamified in this series from the books. Witcher 2 builds on this idea in many positive
ways from the first game. You still have the day and night cycle, monster
hunting is easier with knowledge and alchemy, you can collect many ingredients from plants
and the creatures you kill, and meditating is still a core part of Geralt's ritual. The biggest improvement for me is the weapon
harness, which feels like a real piece of equipment to hold weapons rather than a rigid
bit of model work. Imagine how much lesser this experience would
be if Geralt's swords floated a few inches behind his back again instead of his gear
being a further embodiment of what it's like being a witcher. Every time you switch weapons it's a little
reminder of how Geralt's entire being is devoted to this purpose. And now trophies you get from monsters can
be equipped for stat bonuses as a gameplay incentive to show off how much you are a witcher. As you can see the game tries to develop the
“preparation” part of the witcher fantasy but there's a problem. You don't need to do any of it and, even if
you do, it barely helps. It's not just about gameplay difficulty and
giving yourself an optional challenge—it arguably doesn't matter at all. Potions seem better at first since they have
a new interface to arrange a cocktail of buffs that you drink through the meditation menu
that makes it much more of a ritual, along with a whole tree of skills devoted to just
this part of gameplay. However, there's a big but and I cannot lie
and you other witchers can't deny that potions don't have very strong effects without investing
into this tree and why would you when this part of gameplay starts out so inconsequential? The durations on potions are stunningly low—measured
in minutes instead of hours—after being imbibed through this big gameplay-halting
ceremony. Your exploratory dives through hostile areas
would require many, many duplicates of each potion to keep these buffs rolling, each with
an interruption whenever you take them, and so they become delegated to big fights instead. Plus Geralt now has a generous amount of natural
health regen and doesn't need to pop a swallow potion for it. So what's the big deal then? Doesn't that fit in with the witcher fantasy? Like why am I complaining? Potions are usually reserved for the big fights
and act as a special increase in power level. Well... no, for three completely different
and equally damning reasons. The first is that potion durations keep ticking
down during conversations and cutscenes. So even if you had the foresight to prepare
you're going to have to skip through all of this to have the effects of the potion—or
go slowly the first time to take part in conversations and the like, and then quick load and spam
your way through the same choices. I hope that that sounds awful enough that
I don't need to elaborate on why I think that's terrible. Right? Let's just move on. Secondly, there simply just aren't that many
big fights. Witcher 2 has a handful of bosses—around
four or five. If you generously include some of the mini-bosses
and event group fights then maybe you could get that number above ten. Which still isn't that many in my opinion,
especially since it needs devotion to an entire skill tree to make it work. However, even if you think ten is enough,
this feeds into the next issue as well. The third problem is the counter to what many
of you might be saying if you haven't played the game: drink the potions after the conversations
and cinematics. Well, you can't. You can't drink potions without meditating. You can't meditate in combat. This issue further compounds with the bonkers
tendency the game has to not have clear “point of no return” triggers that also auto save
your progress once you pass them. The Kayran is the best example because you
jump down this pathway at multiple stages and you have to play chicken with yourself,
even (or maybe especially) if you've played the game before, for remembering when this
scene starts if you want to use potions before the auto-save. The silver in the wound for me here is that
it's the middle point between two falls, not even at an interact point. I'm happy that potions are weak and relatively
useless because of these problems. The fact that you can, on your first time
through many sections, have no idea that you might be forced into a big fight makes this
potion administration system a nightmare. So why would anyone, particularly on their
first playthrough, invest further into a tree that can render all those points a waste without
some clunky meta gaming and reloading saves? And after that playthrough you now know that
you don't need alchemy to beat any of these fights. With maybe one exception. And remember this is still an issue even if
you play intelligently and potion up before what you suspect is a boss fight—you might
be out of potion juice by the time the conversation before it is over. But what about the fighting itself? We're close to my giant combat analysis of
this game but the Kayran is a special case. It's more of a QTE setpiece. We really need to think of a new name for
Quick-Time-Event, I really don't like it. Anyway. It looks impressive but once the fight starts
you quickly learn that this is less a monster and more of an animatronic robot event like
something at a theme park, complete with instructions being screamed at you the whole time. This Kayran could crush you like a bug at any point in this fight. In fact if you try to go “out of bounds”
and not follow the rules then the Kayran does exactly that, which obliterates all the immersion
of this struggle for me. You set down the trap you can make ahead of
time or, far faster, just lay down a Yrden sign that you start the game with and requires
no skill point unlock, and then have the Kayran smash a tentacle onto that spot. Dodge at the right moment and then attack
the glowing weak spot. Hit it enough times and Geralt enters a fancy
animation in which he severs the tentacle. The Kayran roars and flails, sweeping the
entire battle arena in the cutscene but Geralt is mysteriously unharmed even though he's
standing right in the path of it. Then it spews poison in a cone in front of
itself that is never aimed at the player. It always covers the exact same area—directly
in front of it like the underpaid but still essential operators inside of the robot hit
the “spray” button. Try to get close to attack the body? You die. Try to get around the sides of it? You die. Try to roll quickly into position to attack
the weak spot without using the sign stun? You can't, your attacks don't do any damage
without the yrden baiting first even if they visible connect. Why doesn't the Kayran attack you with another
thick tentacle when this is happening? I have no idea. I'm sorry but it gets worse. After chopping off three tentacles the Kayran
does a desperate sweep across the arena and this time Geralt is caught on it. Suddenly we're in a QTE(!) and you are more
than forgiven if you don't see the prompt show up in time without any warning. Fail this and you die. Complete this and the Kayran smashes through
the ruined bridge on the nearby cliff and crushes itself in the rubble. So my dear people who have never played this
game before—look at the battlefield in front of you. The Kayran's tentacles are splayed out. Its body is trapped under the collapsed stone. If you look to the left some of its tentacles
are writhing around it and one is picking up rocks and throwing them at you. If you look to the right there's cover to
use to hide from the thrown rocks and a path to the same glowy parts on its main body that
you've been hitting so far on its tentacles. So with all of this information in mind: where
do you think you have to go? Left or right? While you think about it let me point out
to you that the rocks the Kayran is throwing don't actually exist in its tentacle. They either forgot or couldn't get it working. So the end of these tentacles are wrapped
around nothing and then the rock just appears within one frame right at the apex of the
throw as its launched at you. There's no way to know this attack is coming
until you see it a couple of times and I still somehow get tripped up by this because I've
been trained so rigorously to look for proper visual tells for attacks—not magically appearing
rocks. I'm going to guess most of you didn't say
to go right because it's obvious that this is a trick question and the glowy enemy spots
is too easy of an answer. When playing the game yourself you don't know
it's a trick question—in fact you may not even know it's a question at all because it
looks like the only viable path. If you run here you die. Either from the electrical current in the
water, from Sile's spell somehow remaining active after all this time, or the tentacles
closing the path behind you when you try to get here like it's an intentional trap that
you fell for. Although maybe this is the tentacles closing
to try to prevent you from getting here so you find a different way—it just doesn't
happen fast enough. The correct way is up the ruined chunks of
the bridge. Not only is this poorly communicated to you
and doesn't look like something you can walk on, the whole time I did this I was wondering
“What exactly is Geralt going to do at the top of this?” How is this the right answer when Geralt has
no viable plan of attack to exploit at the top of this climb with this giant pinned monster
in the swamp below him? Well, he channels the power of god and anime
and whips out a bomb. That's the end. This is probably the most angry these games
made me, except for maybe a part at the end of Witcher 3. These games are all about monster hunting
with a heavy emphasis on preparation. Gather information. Exploit weaknesses. Craft potions and tools to make your job as
a monster hunter easier. The games are rarely successful with making
all of that worth it but the intent is clear. This game had you run around to craft a trap
for a tentacle so you can destroy weak points you didn't even know existed yet, brew a potion
for a poison spit that isn't even a threat, and in a different contract outside of this
conduct research to understand that dropping a bomb you have to go out of your way to craft
can destroy a nekker nest. But no, the bomb powerful enough to blow a
crater into this elven stonework and rip apart the Kayran, THAT'S the one that the game just
hand waves into existence with no comment and no work to earn it. Can Geralt just spawn these bombs whenever
he wants now? Is that his down+B like he's a Smash Bros
character? I'm more upset about the lost opportunity
for it to be something unique to do. Wouldn't it have been great to build this
bomb as part of the quest leading up to this moment, with multiple stages, characters to
talk to, and problems to solve along the way. Or at least make it a micro-transaction for
the sense of pride and accomplishment? This is the biggest fight in the series. Literally, I mean. There's no other monster in the games or even
the books I think that is larger than this and you could argue that none other has more
tension or build up. There are better fights in Witcher 3 but none
of them try to be unique like this one. Which is why, despite all that griping I just
did, I'm still glad that the Kayran exists. I wish it was better executed of course but
if it's between this and no Kayran fight at all—I'll choose this and be happy for the
context that this big setpiece provides. I have more to say about the Kayran fight
but we're gonna leave it for the Witcher 3 section when we talk about combat in that
game and the context it has within the entire series. You can loot the Kayran for a trophy and some
alchemical parts—Sile also does this and that's actually important so try to remember
it. After that you head back to Flotsam to get
your reward from the representative of the merchants who can now safely leave on their
ships. Triss finds you and explains that she's discovered
an important member of Iorveth's commando group was recently captured and is being held
on Loredo's prison barge—an elf named Ciaran. You go there together and, in what is one
of the weirdest interactions in the entire series, spam your mouse button to channel
axii to calm him while Triss heals him enough so he can be interrogated. I have never seen this succeed—Geralt always
announces failure, even as it seems to progress the quest just fine. I have no idea if this is intentional or something
going wrong—it's like the game forgot that axii was being used to keep him sedated through
the pain of Triss's magic and thinks Geralt was trying to hypnotize him with it. Lots of information is dumped on you here. Letho has betrayed the Scoia'tael and attacked
them, but Iorveth and the other elves don't know about it yet. Geralt's memory is also triggered by something
and he recalls spending time in another dimension with Yennefer after his “death” that happened
at the end of the books. They had their own peaceful home on the Isle
of Avallach or Avalon (the games are inconsistent with what it's called), where they lived together
for an indeterminate period since time can flow differently in other realms, and both
Yennefer and Geralt are effectively ageless. At some point the Wild Hunt showed up to ruin
this Happily-Ever-After and kidnapped Yennefer. So this bridges the gap between the ending
of the books and the beginning of the games, right? Not quite. There's a long period of time unaccounted
for and this reveal doesn't make that clear. You would be forgiven in thinking that Geralt
lost his memory when he was transported from that other dimension with the Isle of Avalon
in it to Kaer Morhen at the beginning of Witcher 1. But no that isn't the case. Geralt still had all of his memories when
he left the Isle and returned to his home planet. He had a whole solo adventure elsewhere in
the world south of the Northern Kingdoms and it's only after that that he ends up outside
Kaer Morhen with his memory erased. You find this out at the end of this game
but it's a bit confusing so I feel like it's better to explain that now. Furthermore, there's another major continuity
error in this scene when Geralt tells Triss that the wraiths of the Hunt have been following
him. He's correct about them showing up in the
Outskirts in the first game but he goes on to say they were there when he killed the
Grand Master. They weren't. That wasn't real and Geralt knows this. Jacques de Aldersberg put them in a state
of shared consciousness, not any physical relocation, which is how Geralt was either
helped or harassed by the people he had met in that game. The Wild Hunt was a part of the mental or
emotional baggage he brought into that dream-like realm but it wasn't actually the real King
like it was in the Outskirts—this is also reinforced by how the King of the Wild Hunt
knows all about the events in the first game and quite menacingly sums up every choice
you made in his final speech. It's a specter of Geralt's time with the Wild
Hunt manifesting like an infection in the shared consciousness spell—sort of like
a virus of Geralt's amnesia. This is why the choice to give over the Grand
Master's soul or not makes no difference. I want to entertain the idea that this could
be a retcon, because I really do think Witcher 1 can be reduced to an unreliable version
of true events, but then this choice to give over the soul if you go that way should have
dire ramifications. It also brings up the problem of how Geralt
teleported back to Vizima if this is now a time travel jump instead of a dream state,
which is something Witcher 3 also claims happened. To be clear some choices you make in Witcher
1 still have consequences in the sequels—Adda being dead or alive being the easiest to point
out. So if this was a real thing, not a mind-link,
then the decision over Alvin's soul should matter. And this isn't harsh damning criticism or
anything I'm just laying the foundation for my big argument in the Witcher 3 video about
how the previous games probably shouldn't be considered canon. But that doesn't mean I'm not an asshole because
there's another thing I want to point out in this scene that doesn't make sense. It's time for a PEDANTIC BOOK DETAIL MOMENT. Ciaran has an immense amount of respect for
Iorveth—who is, by the way, a book character who is only briefly mentioned. Ciaran calls Iorveth an “Aen Seidhe” and
further emphasizes that he's “a real one”. In this context Aen Seidhe just means elf. Literally. This elf is saying “Iorveth is an elf. A real one.” There are another group of elves called the
Aen Elle but they have that distinction because they left this planet during the Conjunction
of Spheres 1,500 years ago—or during a potential Second Conjunction sometime later because
even the lore of this series is a Nightmare Creature of Vague Uncertain Truths for analysis. It looks like the name of a Bloodborne boss—this
is the kind of shit I've had to deal with trying to understand this series. Before that they were all Aen Seidhe, although
it's also possible there was another larger group that the Aen Seidhe separated from just
like the Aen Elle left this one. So unless Ciaran is trying to say that Iorveth
is over 1,500 years old and failing miserably at being clear, or is a pureblood elf instead
of mixed with humans which would be a weird thing for an elf terrorist who hates humans
to say unless they've been indoctrinated in some way?—I don't know. Even then that's a really weird way of saying
this because Ciaran qualifies as being an Aen Seidhe as well. The reason I'm so bothered is because it's
said with such reverence like it's an important detail that might be relevant later! I was so curious what it meant and then I
read the books and said “oh”. Ciaran mentions something called a Rose of
Remembrance. Because of this Triss wants to search for
it in order to use one to restore Geralt's memory in full. There's only one likely place to find them
nearby: among the elven ruins and you can either go together or tell Triss you'd rather
go on your own. Going solo is much faster because a scene
with peasants coming along to break a statue doesn't happen. Triss is insulted by them. A fight breaks out. The ground collapses and the most involved
sex scene in the series plays in this forgotten elven bath house, room... place. This is quite similar to the romance you can
have with Vesna Hood in Witcher 1. People overhear Triss and Geralt going at
it and the sound plays into the legend of the place being haunted. I like this scene because I think sex is a
legitimate part of life and is just as worthy of being explored in games as violence. It doesn't serve the plot much in any way
but neither does a gory execution or many beautifully rendered cinematics in games—and
I still get a lot of enjoyment out of those. My only qualm about the sex scenes are that
they feel too one-sided. The women are often put on display as the
focus and yes Geralt does have his moments for being ogled too but they're much fewer. It just seems immature to me that we have
multiple instances of full frontal nudity in Witcher 2 and 3 and yet showing any whiff
of a penis is strictly off-limits—I don't think that's fair. And that's coming from a 99.8% heterosexual
male. I can't help but wonder how a scene like this
would be realized if it was a player controlled Ciri that seduced a man or another woman—would
her nudity be similarly censored and her partner on full display like Triss is here? I ciri-ously doubt it. Admittedly this scene isn't just eye candy. It does deepen your appreciation of their
relationship a bit, and it can also serve to make the player care about Triss more after
seeing this intimacy instead of having it implied. This is important because Triss is abducted
shortly after this and is gone for pretty much the rest of the game, which is something
that still surprises me today seeing as how heavily she's featured in the promotional
material. You could end up spending way more time with
Roche, who also comes a knocking in this scene, after Triss and Geralt decide they should
leave together, use the rose to restore his memory, and possibly track down Yennefer. Triss is quite devoted to the idea and to
doing anything possible to help Geralt—and you should try to remember this for the Triss
Vs Yennefer showdown we'll be doing in the next video. Because Triss might not be so innocent about
her plans here and may be scheming more than she's letting on. Maybe. Roche isn't happy that Geralt is bailing on
him but conveniently for the story the remembrance spell that Triss wants to use will take days
to prepare and Geralt intends to continue his kingslayer hunt in the meantime. Enter Episode Two of Zoltan “Totally Not
A Scoia'tael Are You Crazy? You Lost Your Marbles Geralt? That's The Funniest Thing I've Ever Heard
And I Hang Out With Dandelion All Day. Me, A Scoia'tael? No Way Witcher-ay” Chivay. The dwarf knows where to meet them. Knows their password. Has been approached by them to command one
of their units—which he swears he declined. To Zoltan's credit Iorveth doesn't hesitate
to murder him along with Geralt in this scene if you say the wrong thing. Have fun reloading out of these pitfalls. First you have to kill an arachas mini-boss
which isn't really important but I have to wonder what amnesiac Geralt means when he
says “I last fought an arachas some time ago” although maybe he's just lying to make
Zoltan feel better about it. Iorveth doesn't believe that Letho has betrayed
him but begins to warm up to the possibility when Geralt claims Ciaran is alive—apparently
Letho lied about that and now Iorveth wants to sort it all out. In case you're lost about this: Letho attacked
Ciaran and his unit and tried to kill them. But he didn't do a good enough job and some
of them survived. He went and told Iorveth that Flotsam's forces,
under the command of Loredo the commandant, attacked and killed Ciaran and his men. When in reality Letho left at least one of
them alive and they were captured by Loredo's men later. There was no attack—it was Letho. Iorveth agrees to pretend to be a hostage
to sort all of this out and tells Geralt where Letho can be found... which is the same elven
ruins where you got the rose of remembrance. And I can't let this go. I'm sorry, I just can't. I tried. I really really tried but I can't let this
go. Why is Letho here this time? If this is his hideout why didn't he come
out and speak to Triss and Geralt, or help them fight off the bandits as a peace offering? Letho doesn't actually have anything against
Geralt—we'll see this very soon. All these two need to do is have a brief conversation
and Letho knows this even more than Geralt does. Letho doesn't seem to have reacted to Geralt
showing up with Iorveth either. He's just... here this time. Hanging out! I don't know if this is poor planning or an
area was cut they were going to use for this or what. The same goes for that line I mentioned earlier
about Letho “knowing Geralt's weakness”. This never comes back up and is never used
or addressed in any way. But really I'm stalling here because this
is it. The whole game has been like a slowly ascending
roller coaster, clacking as it's dragged up, poised upon this moment. Or if you're a millennial—this is where
the bass drops. We've had a few choices and consequences so
far but they all loop back into the same narrative line. If you picture that being drawn along, this
is where it splits open like a vein flooding through a capillary network. This is why we have to go beat by beat, because
there's no chance of discussing this story otherwise. So let's stall even more—before this conversation,
before choosing whether you give Iorveth his sword back when Loredo's men unexpectedly
attack, and before your first fight with Letho. Let's finally talk about the combat. At the end of the game you fight a dragon. The battle arena is at the top of this tower
and this monster has several moves she can cycle through. One of them is the traditional dragon's fire
breath attack. This is what it looks like: I wonder if any of you caught the problem
just from that. Let's play it again. Slower now. This is a frame-by-frame of the dragon preparing
to do this attack. Try to guess when you think damage will be
dealt to Geralt—oh wait you can't it's already happened. This is the damage frame. This isn't a glitch. This is when the fire effect is put onto Geralt. It happens like this every time. This is when the fire hits Geralt. The fire that hasn't just not touched Geralt
yet—it hasn't even left the dragon's mouth—it hasn't even appeared on the screen. This is why Witcher 2's combat system fails. This right here. It's the perfect summation of the problems. It's so perfect that I wish I was brave enough
to just pack it up right now and conclude the combat section with just this. Ladies and gentlemen, we got him. I'm here all week. Try the veal. Animations in games are important for more
than just the appreciation of well crafted visuals. This is something everyone intuitively understands
already but doesn't always consciously acknowledge: animations also carry information. This is why visual fidelity, while not always
that crucial to gameplay, still matters. It's also why the clarity of an artstyle is
far superior to photo-realism or anything really, and I'm noticing more and more how
many games are visually “noisy” in a disruptive way for this information. There's a third layer here though which ties
to gamefeel. Imagine playing Mega Man X and when you press
the shoot button the bullets just appear without X raising his buster gun. Imagine if jumping used the same run animation
and just slid the character model up and then down with the exact same momentum and arc
of the original jump and just the visuals have changed. Imagine if the sword slash in Hollow Knight
had its damage effect area disconnected from the slash animation and it was shifted far
above or ahead of that arc. Completely disjointed from the where visual
information was telling you the attack should appear. Feeling things through animations isn't just
important for communicating how games work to players, it's also one of the greatest
joys you can have when you play a game and it's also probably one that goes unacknowledged
and unappreciated by many players who love games. When you no longer have to meticulously judge
things and get your estimates wrong. When playing the game is suddenly smooth and
intuitive and you can just... do it. Most games have this satisfying period of
committing actions to an extension of your muscle memory. Even games that are just menus. You can memorize that too and you can just
flip through them so much more naturally than you were at the beginning. Similar to how you don't have to consciously
think when you move your real life body—you just do it. And some of the best parts and levels and
boss fights in games can be that process shrunk down to a quick blast of that learning period
to struggling to recognition to improvement to mastery to being able to do it without
really thinking about it. Witcher 2 commits so many crimes against this
idea. Animations don't match. Animations don't play. Effects are completely disconnected from them. When I watched back any fight I did in the
game I could find some of these problems and clipped them out in Adobe Premiere. Any fight. Every fight. I could add a whole hour to this video just
from letting all of these short clips play. But I won't do that. That wouldn't be worth a moon. World of Warcraft is a game you're probably familiar with. Just in case you aren't, here's a simplified
version of how combat works in that game: you select a target and run toward it until
you're in range to use your attacks. If you're a melee class your models will have
to be close to touching. If you're a ranged class this could be anywhere
within 40 yards assuming they haven't changed it again since I last played—it used to
be about 35 for the first few expansions. Melee classes will also use an auto attack
ability that you can typically start by right clicking on the enemy or using any skill once
you're in range, and then you have a selection of those types of abilities that you continue
to add options to as you level up throughout your time with the game. For the sake of a clear example and for a
class that I used to play in the game, let's use a protection warrior. The job of this class and role is to keep
enemies locked onto you by using your abilities to make yourself appear threatening to them
so the rest of your party can focus on dealing damage, and so your healer only has to really
worry about healing you. Most abilities you have in the game do not
need to be aimed and, even when they do, they will cover a wide area of effect. Instead aiming is done by having the enemy
selected as your target. Then, if you're close enough, using the ability
will cause it to happen just like that: an animation on your character will play, an
effect like more damage or inflicting a debuff will be sent out, and a bunch of ratings and
numbers will be checked to see if you missed or were resisted or dodged or parried or dealt
a critical hit and so on. The key difference about this kind of combat—which
is typically called Hotbar Combat because of, well, all the bars involved with it and
selecting your abilities from multiples of them that stretch over the screen, and how
it also drives you to drinking. The key difference is that the animations
are only here for flavor. And this is one of only a few systems I can
think of where this is preferable. Because there's no aiming involved or actual
clashing of character models and weapon models to determine the results of combat actions,
this is the best choice for this system. A protection warrior might have multiple enemies
aggro'd onto them and having the animation of blocking and parrying each individual hit
as they come in, while also needing to play out attack animations too which can interrupt
each other as they overlap, would make this type of gameplay impossible. I'm not here to say that World of Warcraft
has excellent combat or anything but as massively multiplayer online games go it does have its
merits when it comes to cooperative play and many strengths to enjoy in big raids. Nevertheless it has to be acknowledged: animations
are just being “mimed” or paired separately to the effects of abilities and stat checks. Hopefully the pairing of the two are synchronized
well but usually when that happens it's a happy accident. To understand this better we can look at a
game in the same genre that did this poorly. Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic that
came out several years after World of Warcraft. At launch some animations took priority over
effects. So you would use a blaster volley ability
and then try to do a grenade throw for example, and the game wouldn't let you do it until
the animation of the first was over even though the cast bars and cooldowns were done. I'm simulating that issue here in this footage
by the way because when I dived back into the game to record this clip it seems as though
they've fixed it all these years later but I only played it for a few minutes so I can't
say for sure. Anyway, viewed this way you can see the problem:
the animations were adding extra “on use” time to the effects that weren't meant to
be there. Say an ability that's meant to have a duration
of one second up to a second and a half. Contributing greatly to how maclunky and stiff
chaining abilities felt at launch because the game's system was telling you different
information than the animation. A caster in World of Warcraft doesn't have
this problem—you can use instant spells between those that have cast times and some
animations are skipped if necessary to keep gameplay as smooth as Dandelion in a brothel. Area of effect abilities aren't always tied
faithfully to animations either. Including those that don't require targets
to be selected. Concerns about latency can also be a factor
here because the gameplay is always online and has so many people playing at once. But for the most part it's simply the case
that the game wasn't built for anything else in mind. The players are used to it, the developers
are too, it's considered normal and this is a creative use of spawning “damage zones”. So take any fight for example that makes circles
appear on the ground that will deal damage when the slow moving projectile lands in it—communicating
to the player that you need to get out of it in time to avoid damage. In almost every case the projectile doesn't
matter it's just a way to symbolize the timer on the damage circle. Or something like these cone effects that
symbolize an incoming melee strike on some enemies in the game. The attack slash animation has nothing to
do with it, it's just being mimed along with the damage zone becoming “active” and
if you're in there at that time you take damage. There are also positive and helpful effects
that work in the same way in this game. Witcher 1 functioned just like this and, without
a complete overhaul of the system, I think that's a good thing. Imagine how horrendous it would be to play
if only this was changed and nothing else. Awkwardly moving Geralt into position to make
sure his group style sword spins are physically connecting with each target and having your
attack flows interrupted every time you parry or dodge. The whole game would need an overhaul or even
remade completely (hint hint). This is a difference that can be emphasized
to distinguish an RPG system from an action combat system. It doesn't look like it but Witcher 2 is mostly
the same way and the problems here are extreme. The game doesn't make it clear what kind of
combat system it uses because I don't think even CD Projekt fully knows. It's a Frankenstein's monster of ideas and
changes stitched together into what feels like an experiment and... I don't think it was a successful one. Although we do get a lot of good information
out of it. It definitely has action game movement, defensive
options, and direct enough input control. But underneath all that it's hotbar combat. Look at these examples. I'm within melee range of these enemies. Geralt is so close he's about to get a romance
card from them. I'm using attacks and the sword is even visibly
going through their models. But damage isn't being dealt. Why not? Because the “hotbar system” doesn't have
a target selected so these attacks have no effects tied to them because there's no “target”
to send the effects to. The effects can't exist without the reality
of a target. Geralt is just fancily miming hits here. He's playing through empty animations. I can also move much more freely than usual
as I'm attacking here—I also need to point out that the “lock on” icon isn't always
necessary to be “locked on”. Geralt can sometimes pick a target and attack
it without this visual aid. It's not clear if this is a display bug or
not, but it's something you can feel happen as you play; there's a strong magnetic tugging
toward the enemy when you hit attack if you're locked on, and it's noticeably absent if you're
not. What I typically want out of an action game
is that the animation itself is the attack—the weapon or the monster... appendage... has
a collider shaped around it that roughly matches the shape of whatever will make contact with
the target model. When these two collide a hit is registered
and damage is dealt. The attack and the animation are one. In some games—even some very very good games—this
collider can be poorly matched to the part of the enemy model that's meant to cause damage. So you can get hit even though the enemy technically
missed you. It's very frustrating. We often call this a “bad hitbox” but
that might be a strained use of the term, even though I've said it many many times. On this channel. Still, it fits. I hope. Witcher 2 does not use this system, at least
it doesn't for the majority of the attacks in the game. Instead every attack causes an invisible Area
of Effect to appear in front of whatever character starts the attack and it becomes “active”
to deal damage a moment later, synchronized as best as possible to when the moment of
impact should occur between the attack animation and the target model—usually in the mid-point
of the swing. It is exactly like those AOE cones we just
looked at in World of Warcraft, except in Witcher 2 we don't get to see where they are. So if try to roll under an attack and have
the sword pass harmlessly over you? It doesn't matter. You're taking damage. Try to be out of range of the weapon? If the cone Area of Effect is bigger than
the sword swing—which as you can see it often is—then it doesn't matter. You're taking damage. Were you a good few feet away from the projectile? If the AOE is bigger than that difference
then the game doesn't care and you're still going to get hit. What makes matters worse is that effects can
become completely disconnected from animations. Sometimes this seems to happen due to glitches,
other times it's from poor pairing like we just saw with the dragon's fire. But this isn't limited to just attacks. Enemy models can be visually facing one way
on the screen but the game thinks they're in a different position—they can block hits
from their backs while their shield is at the front. You can hit their backs and not get a backstab
bonus because the game thinks they're facing you and the model hasn't caught up to that
yet. Enemies can parry attacks without having their
swords drawn—or they're in the process of drawing them but are still in a parry “state”
because most effects in this game happen independently of their animations. To be clear this system could probably function
just fine with enough testing and tweaking but if you're going to all that trouble it
would probably be better to just have colliders around your animations. Here's an example of everything lining up
just right for once and it looks and feels fine. If the AOEs that these animations spawned
were more conservatively sized and those attack animations were faster so there were fewer
dead frames, then I can already picture improvement. The parry in the first Dark Souls probably
functions just like this even though most of the other attacks in that game use colliders. Rarely does your parry actually make contact
with the enemy swing and it's instead about matching your parry “state” with the correct
frames of the enemy animation. Some weapons even have extra frames and a
wider state of effect to cause a parry to happen. You can sometimes see this awkwardly resolve
with swings being deflected before they're close to you, or anywhere near the weapon,
or so late that it should have dealt damage but it doesn't. This is a mostly functional use of this system
but I have to admit the parries in that series have always felt a little off and looser than
its other moves. And I have to wonder if this is why. For Witcher 2 it's not just enemies that do
this. Geralt's attacks also spawn Areas of Effect
when you have a target. You can see evidence of this early in the
game when you can hit two enemies at once if the second one is standing directly behind
the first. Your attacks don't cleave in this game even
if your sword passes through more than one model, until you unlock a talent that “activates”
this functionality. These examples are from before I get that
ability and damage is being inflicted because the second enemy just so happens to be so
close to the narrow Area of Effect that Geralt projects and then times his swing animation
to when he does an attack. Then in the next group here you can see that
it doesn't happen because the enemies are side-by-side this time so the AoE isn't hitting
them even though the sword does. So again you can think of this as being a
spell-based melee system. First you need a valid target to cause the
spell. When the spell happens it projects that AOE
and hits all the enemies that are in front of it. Even though it's tuned to only hit one at
a time. But sometimes it still hits more than one
if the conditions are just right. By the way that “cleave” talent ability
also supports this because it doesn't actually change how sword damage is inflicted. Instead it radiates damage out from the target
when they're hit to other targets close by, even those that were nowhere near to where
Geralt's sword passed through, like a chain-lightning effect arcing from the main enemy that was
hit. These aren't the only attacks that show proof
of this half-Hotbar Combat system. Geralt's twirl is particularly obvious, with
enemies receiving damage early in the animation when Geralt's sword is on the opposite side
of where the enemy is. Seeing things like this make me also wonder
if some attacks are sent out like spell “pulses” to targets just like how the cleave radiation
functions. Here I clearly roll under the enemy's attack
and still take a hit. Then, because the enemy goes off camera, I
lose my lock on and my attacks are suddenly not dealing damage even though the sword passes
through the enemy model. Letho hits me here when I'm probably, what,
a meter away from him? Could I BE any further away? This is the damage frame. Witcher 2 uses a lot of tracking for attacks
so the “attack effect” might have followed me but Letho's model did not. This tracking can be so severe that even during
a knockback stun caused by using aard the enemy will turn to remain facing you throughout
the entire effect. This is how poorly the Area of Effect is paired
on golems. This is the damage frame on the first punch. And this is the damage frame on the follow
up charge it does. Also these enemies have such large collision
boxes on their models that you usually can't get close enough to them for your sword to
ever visibly connect when attacking but they still receive damage. Here's another time the game locks me on to
an enemy without the symbol showing up. You can see how the attacks are magnetically
attracted to the target and then this third one is off and doesn't do damage because the
lock on resets itself. Then it comes back and damage is fine again. Geralt does his twirly attack here and this
is the frame that somehow connects with the enemy's shield and causes a stagger. Then I roll under his counter attack and this
is the frame that deals damage. Projectiles can miss you so clearly that their
models fly through the air and embed themselves on a nearby surface, but you still take damage. Youtube's compression will probably make this
hard to see but the bolt passes over Geralt's left shoulder and into the wall, while damaging
him. This is the damage frame on this champion's
ballerina axe spin. This one is even worse and shows what can
happen if Geralt moves INTO an AOE even after the main attack swing is over. This is the damage frame. I take a hit here from this far away. This is one of the clearest examples I found. Here's a third one like this because I can't
help myself. And this one is really fun because it's exactly
like my crazy sounding Hollow Knight example from earlier. The area of effect is so far ahead of the
shield during this charge animation that this is when it deals damage. I think it's about 20 frames after this that
the shield finally reaches where I was standing. For the final and weirdest example you have
to pay close attention to the game deciding to lock me on to a target really far away
and then still doing to damage to it. So much that I kill him—from all this way
away. You have to understand that I made a mistake
in this video by not structuring it so I could show the bug montage before this combat section
so for now you just have to take my word for it that this game should have been called
The Glitcher 2. This makes it understandably difficult to
nail down how things work in the game because every so often there will be exceptions like
this that break the rules, but they're probably glitches. Imagine if I hadn't turned the camera while
recording this and didn't see the flash of the lock-on. I'd be confused how this even happened. I mean I still am but... you know... less. Sadly we're not done with combat because this
isn't enough to damn the game. Todd knows I've played many a series with
broken hit detection systems and even enjoyed them. No this is only one part of the Triforce of
Terribleness that ruins combat in the Witcher 2. The others are the skill system, and a collection
of truly baffling design decisions that are entirely separate from this pseudo-action
combat that's closer to a hotbar spell system. And look I'm sorry to be harsh with my language
here, it's a part of the presentation of this channel and a way to be entertaining but sometimes
it comes across as a bit mean. I appreciate the attempt at this combat system
because it really does have potential, but it's hard to remember that this game came
from a fledgling company before the blazing success of Witcher 3 and probably shouldn't
be held to that same high standard. Yet I also don't want to pull any punches
and dilute my own criticism because this game's combat system is by far its weakest asset. This goes so far that the skill tree withholds
information and lies to you. This is a problem unique to this game in my
experience. I have never, ever played another game that
is so burnt that it didn't get its skill tree explanations right. Witcher 2 uses the simple system of Attack
Damage – Target Armor = Damage Dealt. This time there were no experiments needed
to confirm this because the combat log outright tells you—assuming it's accurate. Which it seems to be considering that “minimal
damage” can show up if your attack damage is lower than the target's armor, which matches
with the 1 damage hits you deal since no matter what hitting absolute zero damage isn't possible. Gear matters the most, far more than levels
in Witcher 2, because of this. Luckily it's quite easy to find gear upgrades
and this subtraction system works just fine because numbers are kept so low, especially
enemy armor values. Starting weapons are around the 10 damage
range. Endgame weapons are around 50 to 60. And there's no leveling shenanigans to further
weaken or strengthen you like there were in God of War. It's just stats. In fact leveling is mostly done via main quest
progression. Upon arrival to Chapter 3 in a playthrough
where I did every single side quest I was level 28. In another playthrough in which I ignored
every side quest I was level 25 at this same point. It's kind of weird actually sometimes you
get 2 or 3 whole levels for one main quest completion. You also get more levels if you side with
Iorveth than you do with Roche. Anyway—with that Attack – Armor = Damage in mind, any talent that reduces your incoming damage as a percentage modifier sounds strong right? Well turns out they just add armor points
onto that total. It's just adding to that armor rating and
has nothing to do with percentage reductions. Same goes for any sword damage bonuses too. There's no percentage increase it's just adding
to the attack damage number. It's like the wiki—it lies. This skill that prevents damage when blocking
an enemy hit? This is already how it works on most attacks
before you take this. Plus you can often, but not always, block
an enemy attack without any vigor cost at all, with or without the other talent that
reduces how much vigor it's meant to cost. Sometimes you can do full damage blocks with
zero vigor. There are probably some issues like this in
the alchemy tree too but I never spent a single point there so I can't say for sure. I might have been more persuaded to experiment
with that tree if it wasn't for the truly confusing decision to make the second tier
of talent nodes be a mystery. You cannot see what kind of increased bonus
will come with further investment into a node until you've already committed one point into
it—and sometimes these come with huge new boosts like a new vigor point or a 300% increase
in the vitality bonus of the first tier. And skill points are so few that you can only
fill out one main tree and dabble in another. Ironically in the case of the alchemy tree
this system does not encourage experimentation. But the worst of all of these lies is in the
swordsmanship tree. Having not put a single point in the alchemy
tree I am still confident enough to say there's nothing worse than this. Hold on let me put my glasses on for this
one: the talent Footwork increases your dodge distance by 100% for the first skill point
invested into the node, and 200% for the second skill point. Except it doesn't. It's more like 20% more for the first tier
and another 25% for the second. The real upgrade here is that the roll moves
you faster because it's about the same roll time over an increased distance. How does something like this end up being
wrong? What else in this game, just like those wonky
persuade successful failures, is completely broken and not even communicated to you properly? What makes this dodge roll upgrade situation
worse is that it's required in order to dodge some attacks in the game. There are some moves used by enemies in Witcher
2 that, if you do not have the upgraded version of this dodge, you literally cannot roll away
from it without taking damage. You can still try to block or use a sign to
prevent it but that sometimes takes vigor which you might not have and can still result
in received damage. Whereas the upgraded roll works just fine. The thing is Witcher 2's combat system is
improved by many of these unlocks but it comes across as a full game that's had portions
surgically removed to be upgrade choices rather than additions that complement and bring variety
to an already fleshed out system. The improved dodge roll doesn't just allow
you to respond to otherwise unavoidable attacks, it's also necessary for moving around the
battlefields quickly and getting into better positions proactively instead of always reacting
to enemy swings. What's tragic is that if the game used colliders
for registering damage, and started you with this full suite of options, I think it would
be a great foundation for a combat system. Vigor and signs are also dramatically improved
by having more “ammo” when you get more points. For every point of vigor that you use, Geralt
becomes increasingly fatigued and deals less damage. This caps out at 50% if you've used all of
your vigor which means that a larger point total makes each individual point cause a
lower amount of the fatigue damage reduction. It's not just about having more vigor “charges”
for sign casting and parrying, you can more freely use a sign here and there to spice
up combat without neutering your attack damage. Signs are more important and useful in Witcher
2 than the other games in the trilogy. You still don't need to use them, save for
maybe Quen to absorb the fire breath from that dragon on Dark Mode, but fights are much
more enjoyable and less about waiting for inconsistent openings if you mix signs in
with your melee swings. Aard is especially strong at creating safe
openings and during most of my playtime I was either casting aard or I was aardly casting. Quen isn't nearly as broken in Witcher 2 as
it is in Witcher 3 because it prevents you from regenerating your vigor points while
it's active, which meant I never used it except for that dragon fight. Yrden was good at creating openings on some
bigger enemies but I didn't use this much either. Same goes for Axii which, I don't know, felt
kind of cruel and clunky when I tried it out in some group fights. Meanwhile upgraded Igni felt absurdly powerful
and capable of clearing the whole game on its own with the vigor regen upgrades. See this is the thing—many effective strategies
in the game feel like exploiting your way through encounters, but I think the game forces
you onto this path. Remember how we spoke about the brick wall
that is the first fight in this game and that even I, after beating Witcher 2 multiple times,
still fish out openings and use vigor to get through? There are fights way worse than this but by
then you have more options that break through the bullshit. I just wish most of these options had been
rolled into the base version of the game and then built upon with enemies that can respond
and fairly fight back. Geralt can't cancel any of his attacks once
started. From the instant you click your mouse you
cannot guard or dodge roll out of the commitment. The same is not true for enemies. They can cancel any attacks to immediately
enter a guard state. They can even make this switch in the middle
of an attack, even on the damage frame, even ramming charge moves with all of the momentum
they were using vanishing instantly, or immediately after an attack is finished. You can bait out attacks and then punish when
the enemy whiffs through the air, but this is always a risk if the game randomly decides
that the enemy should parry you. And most parries mean Geralt is stunned into
a counterattack. Although I was able to find some wiggle room
in this system by learning that only the enemy you're locked on to can parry you—so if
you get the AoE cleave talent you can cheat out some safe damage if your main target can't
deflect. This is why aard is so powerful but it doesn't
stop there. Enemies can also turn 180 degrees in the space
of one frame. They can parry while having crossbows out
because the switch to a sword happens way before the animation catches up. And risking an attack into any group, when
you can be randomly deflected into a stun even if you pick your moment carefully after
a whiff, can lead to you instantly being killed in the multi-attack follow up. What you learn is that enemies must be staggered
first to safely attack them, whether that's through aard or a parry of your own. But some groups are so relentlessly aggressive
while also putting up impenetrable deflection defenses that I'm left wondering if CD Projekt
expected these to be beatable with anything other than sign spam, while running out of
range to recover your vigor between volleys. The issue is that this feels like cheating
since you're never in any danger if you play like this. You're just waiting for your “sign ammunition”
to recharge. But the enemies are also cheating with all
this move canceling and instant deflections and animations not making sense so it's like
both sides are ignoring the semblance of a combat system in different ways. And whoever cheats the best wins. Geralt's dodge roll does not have any invincibility
frames. Enemies have avoidance moves that do. Initially, I thought this was an ability specific
to wraiths, who can do a “phasing” defensive ability and that it makes sense because they're
ghosts. But nope many other monsters like nekkers
can do the same thing—if you check out the combat log you can see the attacks still register
as hits but say “the target absorbed all damage” while they were in their evasive
maneuvers. It is incredibly frustrating to see your attacks
go through enemy models and still have it not do anything because of i-frames, especially
when your own avoidance move isn't given the same power. This type of discussion—about how the rules
for the player can and should be different than the rules for enemies—is beyond the
scope of even this video. For now I just want to say that enemies having
i-frames at all is deeply questionable to me. It turns games into an RNG system of whether
your hit will land or not. Imagine how frustrating a first-person shooter
would be with that system. You aim an attack carefully at an enemy's
head—you see the bullet leave the gun, collide with the enemy's skull, and see “MISS”
pop up because hits are determined by random chance skill checks even if the visuals show
otherwise. Geralt has long wind ups before attack animations
deal damage. Some enemies have zero telegraph attacks that
you must preemptively block or dodge away from. And some have attacks that land without any
animation at all. Some encounters can also start after a cinematic
or a conversation and deal damage to you before you've had a chance to move. But then sometimes enemies turn around for
no reason and attack empty air, probably because attacks were queued and targets were lost. Something similar can happen to you too when
the game randomly decides that no, you're actually targeting this other enemy way far
off the screen not the one in front of you, so when you attack you're ripped away from
your actual target and unexpectedly flung far in the opposite direction with one of
your gap closer moves. This leads us to the final point I have for
this combat section (it's the last page for this I promise) and it's one of the most important,
almost as if I planned to leave it for last. Combat in this game shares a surprising trait
with one of the mini-games. Dice rolling. Whenever you choose to attack, after being
properly locked on and playing by the rules, there's one last stumble that can end up being
fatal. Geralt randomly selects what attack he does
from a list. There are multiple versions of quick, basic
hits—like a slash or a stab. But then there are rolls into thrusts, at
least two different versions of spinny-spin-spin pirouettes of death, and a couple gap closer
versions of each of these. Like a clogged toilet this problem flows both
ways. Are you too far from an enemy and hit an attack
expecting Geralt to do the gap closer animation jump or spin or roll for a surprise hit? Well sometimes Geralt will just attack empty
air in front of him instead, even if he's close enough for the gap closer to happen. Are you already at melee range and want to
do a quick final slash that will knock off the enemy's last sliver of life? Well sometimes Geralt will do the gap closer
animation at point blank range for no god damn reason, meaning it takes twice or even
thrice as long for the attack effect to be sent out—meaning you can, and will, die
because of random selections on what attacks Geralt decides to use entirely divorced from
any consistency you can learn based on your position relative to your target. Sometimes you can roll up on a new enemy and
attack expecting to do one single hit, and end up doing three or four hits and kill it
right away. I suspect the fundamental issue here is a
desire for the gameplay to be visually impressive above all other things. These moves look great and they're almost
as flashy and varied as the animations in the first game while providing much more player
control. That's impressive! But combat systems need consistency to feel
good, and this did not get enough development time to tighten up all these pitfalls like
God of War 2018 received for its impressive looking animations that still function with
perfect consistency. And I'm well aware that it's not fair to compare
a game that came out in 2011 to a game that came out in 2018—it's just an example to
show where I think Witcher 2 went wrong. It can't be a guessing game of what's about
to happen when you hit a button, especially when death can come at you so fast. Oddly this push for impressive visuals feeds
into another major criticism I have for Witcher 2, one that we'll get to shortly in two hours. Isn't it crazy that I can say things like
that? So in conclusion: the combat in this game
is a mess because of poorly matched animations to attack effects, a myriad of glitches, a
skill system that lies to you and mostly should have been baked into the starting options,
enemies that appear to cheat the rules that players must abide to and encourage cheese-y
counter-play, and Geralt's main form of dealing damage having a dice roll attached to it for
deciding the attack duration and animation. Most people hate Witcher 2's combat system
and I hope that I have adequately explained why here, and done it well enough for those
of you who dislike it to feel vindicated. I'm sure that Witcher 3 will have none of
these glaring problems and its combat section will be much shorter than this, right? We can circle back from this odyssey to our
meeting with Letho because it's quite a cool moment for combat. Despite all the flaws I just pointed out Witcher
2 does still have many options to use during fights. Many of which most players likely haven't
learned by now. So here comes Letho to change that in what's
probably one of the most aggressively bullshit teaching seminars in any game. If you've figured out already that you need
to stun and then punish to defeat all enemies then Letho is a pushover just like all the
rest of them. If you haven't then sans that knowledge you're
going to have a bad time. It's a much more extreme version of the fight
against Gascoigne in Bloodborne. You're a hunter. He's a hunter. Learn to use your sidearm better. He's here to show you how. Even if it means he has to kill you. A lot. Letho shows you how many tools are in your
arsenal that you might not have been using all this time and that it's also okay to fight
dirty. Witchers aren't honorable paladins despite
how much Geralt might think of himself as such from time to time. Monsters already have a supernatural advantage
and fights are meant to be won using everything that's available. Claw and bite and scratch your way with all
that's at your disposal and every inch you give could be your last. Unfortunately combat is rarely like that but
I think playing on Hardcore Permadeath mode can come close to making you feel that tension
in every fight. I can't recommend that mode to anyone, nor
will I ever seriously play it myself because of all the glitches in the game, but I can't
help but approve of the idea of it. Nothing gets you more into the witcher mindset,
and makes every crumb of advantage you can find matter, than the threat of game-ending
death in every fight. You cannot win the battle against Letho. You get his life down enough to trigger a
cinematic in which he kicks your ass, no matter how handily you were beating him in the fight
while you were in control. This is one of the three Cardinal Sins of
video games as far as I'm concerned along with Unskippable Cinematics and Unnecessary
Inventory Management. If I used a scoring system then any of these
would result in a whole point knocked off the final rating. But I don't so I won't. What I fail to understand is why you're able
to Game Over on this fight when you end up losing in the cinematic. And to be clear this isn't just about Witcher
2 it goes for every game that has this sort of win in the battle, lose in the cutscene
problem. Wouldn't it make perfect sense to have this
cinematic play if you lose the fight and make it very very difficult so you can actually
lose it instead of the game just waving its hand and making you lose it after you win,
with a slightly different cinematic that plays if you somehow do win so this doesn't feel
like a cheapshot against player agency in a game built around player agency? Letho barely gives you any honest or useful
information in your conversation before this fight, so it's doubly confusing when he lets
Geralt live at the end of this because “now they're even”. Especially since he'll happily kill you earlier
in the fight if he does enough damage to you soon enough—because apparently you had to
hurt him enough for him to remember “Oh I owe him” and now I have to be even. That's kinda weird huh? Shouldn't the cinematic play no matter what? If it's all about being even it shouldn't
matter when he kills him. Anyway, they talk more honestly during this
battle than they did in the garden above and it's really frustrating on subsequent playthroughs
because Letho only has to say a handful of words to Geralt to end this conflict forever—and
Letho is more than intelligent enough to know what those words would be, and to also know
Geralt is one of the last people on the planet that he would want as an enemy. Sorry to have to bust out a slur here but
Geralt is an OBJECTIVELY better fighter and witcher than Letho and Letho knows that. In fact Letho should have several burning
questions and answers for Geralt given their history. They should be sitting down to have a drink,
not fighting. This is such a jarring problem that it comes
close to being a plothole. It's the equivalent of a character in a book
stabbing themselves in the thigh with some scissors “just to see what would happen”
as forced dramatic tension. Or not telling other characters incredibly
important, VITAL information that could save everyone's lives including their own because
“well, you never asked!” But enough stalling. We have to continue with what has now become
an exponentially more complex game. If you betray Iorveth then Loredo's men capture
him while you're fighting Letho, and Roche finds you afterwards. If you give Iorveth back his sword then he
leads his elves to victory and he finds you instead of Roche. Before leaving you reeling in the bathhouse, Letho said he's gonna go find Triss and force
her to teleport them both away from Flotsam. So you have to urgently get back to town to
find her and, depending on this same choice with Iorveth and his sword, a very different
sight is waiting to welcome you. If Iorveth was captured then Loredo is throwing
a celebration. The town has been decorated while you were
unconscious in the bath house. There's a lovely feast with a really dark
edge to it being held outside the tavern. Meanwhile if Iorveth got away and Loredo's
men were defeated, a riot has broken out with the friendly non-humans being blamed for this
defeat. I didn't give Iorveth his sword back the first
time I played so seeing this riot on my second run was surprisingly disturbing and is among
the most powerful differences in all of the games especially since you spend so much time
here. The difference is so severe and the game doesn't
sugarcoat anything when showing the devastation and cruelty of the racists among the humans. It's like the darkness that has infested Loredo's
mother and her son from her time in the asylum has descended upon the whole town. There are more groups to interact with on
this path if you try to quell the rioters. Just watch out for any stray pitchforks. On both paths Dandelion is the key to finding
out what happened to Triss. You and he follow a trail of blood to Sile's
room where the corpse of her bodyguard can be found—the bodyguard that was never ever
shown at any point before this so I have to wonder why this detail was included. Her megascope has been recently used, which
is sort of like a cellphone that requires as much set up as a Virtual Reality system. Triss was using a different version of it
in Witcher 1 with that magical mirror. They come back a few times after this and
they can also be used for teleportation spells and probably a few other things. There are actually two major differences that
can happen here depending on your choice with Iorveth's sword: the madam of the brothel
will hang herself if Iorveth is captured because she's been feeding them intel under Loredo's
nose and she thinks she'll be discovered now that he's been taken to the prison barge on
the dock. So this lone prostitute will be here instead,
having spied through a hole into the room with the madam before she killed herself,
and tell you that Triss spoke to someone called Dethmold when she used the megascope. You might feel like this is backwards since
she lives if the riot breaks out whereas her death is a quiet pocket of tragedy that you
can skip entirely if you decide not to check out her room while the feast goes on in the
streets. If she's alive she gives you another letter
to pass along to Iorveth and, most curiously, the person Triss speaks to on the megascope
has changed. This is the first “dimensional shift”
alteration that happens. The first of many. Your choice with Iorveth has no bearing on
who Triss would decide to contact on this megascope and yet it's still changed. These aren't two different conversations either—both
the madam and prostitute are present in the scene doing the exact same things before it
happens. There's a reason why I think this dimensional
shift happens and it's mostly okay but it won't make sense until we get to Chapter Two. Philippa Eilhart is who Triss speaks to on
the helped-Iorverth-line. Dethmold on the other. There are three things I dislike about these
conversations with them. The first is that the “failed a speech check
but it still succeeded” issue crops up again. I believe with both of them like the whole
feature is as busted as youtube's copyright system. The second is that one of these conversation
choices ends the conversation, but they don't tell you that. So enjoy playing conversation roulette and
reloading to see the other choices if you accidentally picked this option and miss out
on the rest of the information. Lastly, this guy is named Dethmold. That's ridiculous. Why is he named Dethmold? That's like calling someone DiseaseFungus
or LethalGrowth or SkullMushroom. Gee, I wonder if he's going to end up being
a horrible person? (Spoilers: he does). This is a sharp return to Saturday Morning
Cartoonsville and while ultimately he isn't quite that bad, I wish they had stuck with
his book name which is simply Detmold. Like Detlaff from Blood and Wine. One letter is all it takes to go from unreasonable
to reasonable. Or the opposite: imagine if he was called
Dethlaff. Cedric, the elf we met earlier when investigating
the Kayran, was apparently involved in this scuffle with Letho. So Geralt follows his trail of blood into
the forest to find that his injuries have him near death. Cedric suffers from magical visions which
is one of the reasons why he kept himself perpetually drunk. He tells you that Letho stalked his lumbering
mountain self into Flotsam and kidnapped Triss after she was done using this megascope. Letho forced her to teleport them both to
a place called Vergen, which presently you have little knowledge about. Before dying, he also reveals that he's foreseen
that Geralt will regain his memory after lifting a powerful curse in that Vergen place. Cedric is barely in the game but the strength
of CD Projekt's writing when it comes to characters is proven by how this scene still has a good
kick to it. The forest gathers to send off this elf that
has lived here for so long and may have been communicating with him through his powers. He only had two or three scenes and yet Cedric
felt like a real being that existed in this world and had a life lived here. It's a good thing he wasn't called Dethmold. After this Dandelion and Zoltan show up as
the angel and devil on Geralt's shoulders, although since it's this game it's impossible
to tell which is which. Traveling farther up the Pontar is the new
goal to save Triss, and both of your friends represent your choices. Dandelion is here to represent the human option
and tells you that Roche is planning a final operation before sailing up the river. Zoltan is here to represent the filthy elves
(I'm unbiased by the way) and tells you that the Scoia'tael are also launching an important
operation before also leaving for the same place. This is probably another coincidence—in
the overheard conversations with Triss when she used the megascope, you get a preview
of what's going on in Vergen. There's someone called Saskia the Dragonslayer
there leading an uprising. Iorveth is working with her and I can't find
any other explanation for this connection other than it's just a big coincidence that
Vergen is where all of this converges and also Iorveth was involved with Letho before
that and that's why you followed and now you're going to Vergen as well. It's kind of a mess I don't know. I have to be honest though and say this didn't
bother me, nor did I notice it, until I was writing this part of the script. So maybe it doesn't matter and/or I misunderstood
something somewhere. But Iorveth could be imprisoned at this moment depending on your choices, right? Well Zoltan “Still Not A Scoia'tael, It's
Not Like That Geralt! A Scoia'tael? Me? I Can't Even Spell The Word! I Don't Even Like Squirrels! I Could Never Eat One!” Chivay wants to join the Scoia'tael to rescue
all the captives on Loredo's prison barge. He wants to do this regardless of whether
Iorveth is in there or not—and this sudden urgency is set off because you've killed the
Kayran so the prisoners can be sent down the river now to a place called Drakenborg. Zoltan implies non-humans are brutally tortured
there and I think it's a shame you never get to see this place in Witcher 2 or 3. Because I would really like to see some elves
suffering. I imagine--(I'm kidding by the way). I imagine it as a black evil Castle Grayskull
with blood dripping out of its eye sockets. And it would have been a cool location to
explore with some quests or something I think it has potential. Either way this is ridiculously out of character
for Zoltan. In the books he's actually vehemently against
all the Scoia'tael and thinks that progress gained through suffering isn't progress at
all. What a cool guy. He wouldn't risk his life like this to free
terrorist murderers, although maybe CD Projekt decided that the treatment of non-humans had
worsened since the books and Zoltan has changed his mind about some things. Can't wait to talk about book Zoltan by the
way, there are some surprises there for some of you I think. There's a big problem with that though—and
with Iorveth and the Scoia'tael still existing—that we'll speak about in the next Chapter. So this right here is the biggest decision
in the game. Some people probably think it's if you give
the sword back to Iorveth but that's actually not the case. Whether you choose Roche or Iorveth here is
the choice that determines how the rest of the game plays out and the earlier split we
saw was just a prelude, although it is still an impactful one. This is a divide which causes Witcher 2 to
become two separate, almost unique games. Assets, locations, and characters are reused
on both paths of course. But for most of the rest of the game, this
choice will result in two vastly different experiences. This is incredibly impressive and ambitious
but it also makes discussing the game equally as complicated. Witcher 2 is not necessarily better off because
of this decision even if it is undoubtedly more interesting. Naturally that means we should stall some
more. There's a side-quest in Flotsam that I didn't
speak about yet, and it's an important one. The Blue Stripes and Roche claim a garrison
near the tavern. Outside of it you can run into a man who works
for Thaler from Witcher 1. If you let him live then Thaler has sent a
message of support and advice: to trust Roche because he's a patriot. When I imported my save in which I killed
Thaler in the first game this guy wasn't here although that might have been a glitch considering
what happens in Witcher 3. Inside the garrison is an arguably more amusing decision that can definitely carry over into
the next game, but that's not the only reason I want to talk about this quest. Currently, the thing that most impresses me
about writing is planning and cohesion, especially when a lot of little details come together
for a big reveal at the end. This scene starts out poorly, as you bond
with Ves and the other Blue Stripes, with some boring arm wrestling matches and a confusing
as hell knife throwing challenge that you can lose before you realize it's even started. But then some peasants come in and complain
about the Blue Stripes ruining some religious site during one of their excursions. Roche takes them seriously until they throw
out the insult “whoreson”. Now you can either let this go or intervene and try to calm Roche down (whoa there Roche),
which can lead to a fist fight with him and you kicking his ass in front of his own men. I never saw what happened here if you let
Roche win so I can't comment on that, sorry. Regardless of whether you fight or just leave,
Ves will explain to you that Roche is literally the son of a whore. His family was poor and his mother turned
to selling herself to keep her family fed. It shows you a different side of Roche and
why he's so fiercely loyal to Foltest's line but we have to rewind a bit to see why I find
this so impressive. In the Prologue, after going through the day's
events, you'll remember I showed you that you can bait more information out of Roche
and even insult him to escalate the situation into what Geralt thinks might be a way to
break free. Geralt throws out the typical insult “whoreson,”
it's a very common one in this world. Roche reacts violently and, this is critical,
most video game writers wouldn't have done this. Most video game writers wouldn't have the
forethought or the opportunity to have Roche be consistent with information the player
hasn't gotten yet. This isn't a set up. It isn't foreshadowing. It's just great attention to detail. Similarly, when you walk through Flostam with Zoltan earlier, he will speak about King Henselt
of Kaedwen and how he's vying for more power. Henselt won't show up in this game for hours
yet, but the game's writers seemed to have had all of this planned out and could include
details like this when it felt natural because they knew the whole story. If you make it up as you go along then it's
simply not possible to do this properly. Unless you want to do tons and tons of editing. Which is really hard to do in video games. It's also another way that the background
political workings of this world make total sense if you decide to invest your time into
reading the books and paying close attention to this game. Or you can blissfully act like Geralt does
in the tavern scene when Triss, Zoltan, Roche, and Dandelion all speak about the future of
Temeria. Geralt is a gamer and isn't a fan of politics
and you can align yourself with him in that regard if you like. Just be aware that these events were carefully
calculated for this game and, even though he may appear disinterested, Geralt is sharp
enough to follow it. In fact in Chapter Two it can start to feel
like he's given up the doritos and mountain dew and understands it more than you do. That's not all there is to do with the Blue
Stripes. Stay with them, get drunk off your ass, and
in the morning you have the annoying task of reclaiming all of your stuff. I dislike that you can't just go immediately
back to the Blue Stripes and speak to Ves about this—it's pretty obvious that that's
what you should do. Instead you have to follow the trail of information,
bribe Madam Margot at the brothel to hear the sorry state Geralt got himself into while
drunk, and then go to Ves because Geralt won't think it's a good idea to ask Ves without
speaking to Margot first. This presents itself as a minor flavorful
quest to allow you to see more of Roche's unit but it's actually crucial set up for
a main story moment later if you follow his path. But right now this tattoo is what I want
to speak about. Triss can remove this for you with some magic,
some laughter, and some reagents. Live, laugh, love. However, if you decide you want to keep it
then you will keep it. Import that save to Witcher 3 and it's still
there, with no way to remove it in that game without using a mod—at least I never found
an in-game way. I never noticed anyone commenting on it in
Witcher 3 but I think it's a really nice touch. Nice enough to stall some more before talking
about the tough part of Witcher 2, at least. If you go with Roche then he is either angry
at you or pleased depending on whether you gave Iorveth back his sword. Either way the plan is to overthrow Loredo
before leaving since they've learned the commandant is in bed with Kaedwen and Roche can't let
this important trade post be taken away from Temeria. You have to help Roche with this if you want
to sail with them to Vergen, but it's also a petty enough reason to go with the Scoia'tael
instead since you have no idea how long Roche's plan will take to complete and every wasted
moment is one that Triss remains in danger. The Scoia'tael are a viable option in order
to save this time—if you're not disgusted by their terrorist ideology, of course. Ves goes into Loredo's manor undercover as
a prostitute and you sneak in later for what is possibly the third but still, somehow,
not the last stealth section in the game. Thankfully you can choose to fight everyone
instead if you like, including Loredo's mother in a QTE that results in her brutal decapitation
if you succeed. The game cuts away and then back to Geralt
throughout this to show what's happening with Ves in Loredo's room at the top of the manor. There never seemed to be any different outcomes
here whether I stealthed or slaughtered my way through his men, nor any different interactions
in the final encounter if I met with another woman in the garden that was part of the plan
or chose to sneak in through the caves as my own way back into the estate. So many options. No matter what Loredo is waiting to ambush
you by rushing through this door with a halberd which you need to pass a QTE check to survive,
and then you kill him in straight combat. Although not before he gets a sucker strike
on you while the game is still loading. After killing Loredo all the doors in the
room magically lock themselves, including the one you used to come in and the one Loredo
slammed his way through with his weapon. And I'm very sorry that this bothers me. You have to loot his body and free Ves before
you can continue. In the next room is an elf woman named Moril. She's been Loredo's... personal... prisoner
and is in the final stages of pregnancy. She has a great if tragic line about this: Moril is the missing elf that you heard Cedric
speaking about earlier. This is one of the more subdued mysteries
of this Chapter that has a sad ending. Moril goes into labor, Ves delivers the baby,
and after it's announced that it's a boy Moril slits her own wrists and dies. You never find out for sure why she does this
but my guess is that if the baby was a girl that she probably wouldn't have. Having it be a half-human male, and a constant
reminder of the imprisonment and torture that Loredo inflicted on her, was too much for
her to continue living. Or maybe the baby was mostly human instead
of equally elf. Or maybe she had promised herself to continue
living only until her baby was born. Or maybe it's meant to be her stopping the
cycle. Loredo's mother gave birth to a boy and she
clearly infected him with some disturbed darkness. Moril looks at this and sees that she might
do the same to this boy after what she just went through and decides to put a stop to
it. It's quite tragic and that's the note on which
the Flotsam chapter ends for the Roche path. A place so horrible with people so terrible
that the Moril of the story commits suicide at the end. The racist Loredo, while keeping his fellow
racists enraged about the non-humans, was forcing himself upon one regularly. Even one of Roche's men reinforces this reprehensible
behavior, which you can choose to dish out some punishment for. As I said in the Witcher 1 video, I hate the elves in this fictional universe for reasons
way worse than we've seen so far. But despite my jokes about it even I hate
how they're treated in Temeria and Flotsam. It's Black Rayla's approach in Thronebreaker
that I think would work out best for this world—humans and elves should respect each
other but full co-existence simply isn't possible. If it weren't for the Wild Hunt and the implications
of it that we haven't gotten to yet then maybe there could be a chance, but the humans and
elves have simply treated each other too despicably for far too long for me to see a lasting peace. And this isn't one of my jokes: I really do
think this is mostly the elves' fault, even though the humans are the far more evil aggressors
at the moment. To put all of this into perspective, even
Ciri, Yennefer, and Geralt are racist toward the pompous elves who think they're still
so superior to every other race but especially the humans after they've lost the battle for
their own planet to them. Dwarves, gnomes, and half-lings have found a way to make it work. Although the humans definitely have work to
do there when it comes to race relations. There's definitely some unfairness and prejudice
there I don't want to downplay that but co-existence is definitely possible. While the elves—even most of them who claim
to want peace and co-existence, still find a way to get their anti-human digs in about
how they're closer to animals than to parity with elves. Plus the other races also seem to hate the
elves and get an equal amount of vitriol back from them, with no interference necessary
from humans to get a row on. Elves don't just think humans are like animals. They think that way about every race that
isn't their own and probably have felt that way about every other race they've found on
other planets too. There's one more noteworthy thing here that
happens at the end of this chapter—the first time control of Geralt is taken away from
you and awkwardly transplanted into someone else: either Roche or Iorveth depending on
which path you're on. This isn't like when you were Triss earlier
and had to choose conversation choices—this is full control. I hate this section so much for many reasons. First of all if you're Roche and didn't give
Iorveth his sword then it's never explained how he escaped captivity. You have to play the Iorveth side to understand
this and that's just the beginning of the “you have to play both sides” problem
for this game. If you only do this one playthrough you have
to remember what Zoltan said about their plans, assume they succeeded without you, and this
resulted in Roche and Iorveth somehow meeting in the forest in broad daylight even though
you were in the town all throughout the day and have been attacking Loredo during the
night—the same night that it now is while Roche tells this story. Secondly your moveset is sharply restricted
as non-witcher Roche so your options to safely stun and then punish are limited. Iorveth has the same long combo swings and
twirls and the bullshit ability to deflect mid-attack like any other elf enemy. If you win then one of the worst things in
all of the games happens: Roche stands over Iorveth and gloats. They talk for a bit, and then are interrupted
before Roche can finish him off. This is actually said aloud in enough detail
“Blast! Your reinforcements are here I don't have
time to kill you! Next time Gadget, next time!” that it took
longer to voice this than it would have taken to kneel down and kill him. If Iorveth wins then he just lets Roche live
for a reason I don't comprehend. I understand that Iorveth and Roche have a
begrudging respect for one another but both outcomes here are beyond stupid. Especially for the Roche path because Iorveth
is barely in the game after this and could have easily been removed. Whereas if you go with Iorveth, Roche still
has an important role to play in Chapter Two. The Iorveth ending in Flotsam is about the
same length as the Roche one but has more choices. If you haven't picked up on it yet I had to
do a ton of saving and reloading on all three of my playthroughs of this game—I've actually
gone through Iorveth's version of Chapter Two five separate times to see many different
outcomes. Roche's I only did twice because it has fewer
choices but I think it's the more enjoyable of the paths. Iorveth's gives you more important information
about the story though and it also links slightly better to Witcher 3 so I think that's the
better choice if you're only going to do one playthrough as you go through the trilogy,
but if you do two like you're supposed to then I think Roche's route has the more enjoyable
quests and conclusion. So we're back in the forest with the angel
and devil on Geralt's shoulders. Following Zoltan means yet another trek up
to the secret ruined garden where you found the rose of remembrance. If Iorveth is free then he'll be happy to
work with you to save the rest of the elves in the harbor from Drakenborg. If he's imprisoned because you didn't give
him his sword then you will have to coordinate an attack with the rest of the elves to storm
the pier, slaughter Loredo's guards, and then convince an angry Iorveth that you're really
there to help him. If Iorveth isn't a prisoner then you can still
do it this way but you have another option to pretend to have captured him again and
lead him through the streets in what became a surprisingly poignant scene for me. There was just something about walking Iorveth
through this crowd, head bowed, and him saying that after all the pain he's inflicted on
this place that this is his first time inside the walls. It's the first and perhaps only time that
he seems to consider that the war he's fighting is senseless and not just because it's something
he knows he can't win—naturally this still concludes with the big fight for control of
the prison barge. There's a problem with this though, isn't
there. Have you noticed it yet? The criminality of it. On Geralt. It's going to get worse than this on Iorveth's
route before the end. Surprisingly there's still one more thing
to do here before leaving with Iorveth. On Roche's path the Scoia'tael still manage
to succeed without Geralt. On Iorveth's path however, on their own without
Geralt, the Blue Stripes are as useful as facts in a political debate and result in
sweet FA. There is a line later from Roche that implies
they still tried to do their plan but it failed with Ves almost being killed and Roche is
furious with Geralt about that, but there's absolutely no evidence of this and there's
no nighttime opportunity for them to try because if you go with Iorveth the Scoia'tael attack
happens first. You can kill Loredo on Iorveth's path too
and Roche still says this to you. It's another way—probably unintentionally—that
Roche appears like a gigantic screw up. Anyway, Loredo has put a bunch of elfish women
in the top of the tower on the pier and threatens to set it on fire if Iorveth sails away. He doesn't even consider stopping. The boat is theirs. He doesn't give a siingle shit which is another
reason why I greatly prefer Roche as a character even if Iorveth seems to be the more capable
of the two. Although to be fair to Iorveth, Roche is never
put into this same kind of dilemma, although there is a part later that kinda comes close
to this and Roche reacts with a lot more emotion and seems to care about his people way more
than Iorveth does. Geralt is having none of it and jumps off
the boat—and it's only after that happens that you have a choice. Despite what the people say around you on
the pier—about the witcher being right and that they should help save the elfish women—you're
the only one who can do it. So do you want to run after Loredo to kill
him and potentially save any other hostages he has in the town square and the rest of
Flotsam? Or do you rush up the flaming tower and save
the decoy damsels? You can't do both because Iorveth comes back
and won't let you go after Loredo if you choose the women, and if you choose Loredo then the
tower burns and the elves die. I really like how Geralt makes the initial
decision to jump off the boat on his own though. It reinforces the idea that while this is
exploration of free will through all the choices you make they're still anchored by the fundamental
urges that Geralt would have in these situations. If the elves die then Dandelion apparently
tried to help while you were gone and ended up burning himself. He's on the Scoia'tael ship recovering. Iorveth, in a display of arrogance that makes
me wish there was a choice to kill him somewhere in the game, criticizes the human onlookers
for not helping right after he just did that himself. If you save the elves then Iorveth is grateful
and doesn't care that Loredo escaped. “Someone else will kill him. It's meaningless”, says the elf that's been
meaningfully harassing this town killing innocent people for months and months. Curiously you can skip Iorveth's version of
his fight with Roche if you don't ask about it. Probably because it's completely bonkers. In the short time you've been gone Iorveth
apparently sailed a bit down the river, got off the ship, says he was trying to save the
women in the burning tower but instead went into the forest to find Roche, had a fight
with him, either nearly killed him or got cut up himself, was rescued by his Scoia'tael
or gloated for a few minutes instead of saving his own people, went back to the ship, turned
it around and sailed back up the river to meet Geralt, and heal himself of any grievous
injuries if Roche won the battle. It makes Iorveth's speech before this hilarious
too “I let Roche know that he's leaving only because I'm letting him” and then in
the flashback my boy kicks his ass and leaves him half dead on the ground. I wonder if Iorveth lost his eye by rubbing
some of his own bullshit into it. In closing I'd like to talk about how there's a large amount of irony in the endings of
this chapter and that I think it's wonderfully intentional. For one it seems like the non-humans of Flotsam
are left in a better position if Iorveth is captured, the Scoia'tael scattered, and Roche's
route is taken by Geralt. There are no riots. The humans mostly kill each other instead
of elves. And Loredo is overthrown to be replaced by
someone who is presumably at least a little more fair to non-humans since I don't see
how it could be worse. Meanwhile if Iorveth isn't taken and Geralt
helps free the prisoners on the barge, many more non-humans die and there's a high chance
Loredo lives to incite race wars another day, like a bald vindictive Hitler, who is only
going to amp up the cruelty after publicly taking an L so big they could use it to teach
kids on Sesame Street. It seems like Geralt choosing to help someone
can often make it worse for them, which I think is definitely intentional and adds to
the bleak reality of this game. We'll see this happen again with Roche in
Chapter Two. I can't help but think of the Outskirts again as Geralt sails away. No matter which boat you're on, Dandelion
speaks about the events that just happened and what lies ahead as they travel up river—but
my mind was still on Flotsam and the past. I wish there had been a quiet scene here for
some reflection, maybe a subdued conversation with someone on the deck of the boat under
the night sky as they travel up the water like the one that happens at the end of Blood
and Wine. For all of this game's improvements to presentation
over Witcher 1, the proper pacing of the story and recognizing when players need a beat,
or even a few moments, wasn't found until Witcher 3. It's one of the most subtle but still meaningful
improvements the third game has. In fact it wasn't until writing this script
that I realized how much heart is missing from Witcher 2. Witcher 3 has a lot more soul with its interactions
and especially the connections you can make with some characters. Witcher 1 has this too but it has a lot of
that awkwardness and poor presentation that kind of drags it down but the intent is still
there. Witcher 2 is a lot more sterile of these and
it's a lot more focused on the story that it wanted to tell. And that's not a bad thing, it does a lot
of good things story-wise especially some of the ones that we'll see later. But in terms of warm interactions with a lot
of its characters—it's only done a handful of times in this game despite having some
pretty good characters. So I think that could have been done a little
better. I was still dwelling on the tragedy of Flotsam,
linking it back to Witcher 1, while Dandelion prattled on and I was barely listening to
him. I think it's a brave thing to put the player
into a situation where there's no right answer. Is Flotsam better off now? For some people, yes. But what about for most? What about those that deserve it the most? Who does deserve it the most? Even the discovery of Moril, and how that
might be a happy ending for her and the friendly elves that are trying to co-exist with humans,
ends up being a dead end for salvation. The meaning of all this and the moral is torn
away from you. There's no lesson here. There's no progress. It's just tragedy feeding into tragedy. Flotsam is the most dense and real place in
the series for me—save for maybe Novigrad. But unlike that big city it's something that
you can fully understand and make many connections between the people who live here and their
shared, congealed struggles. The ending brings many of these separate characters
together and shows how interlinked their lives are—and of course have to be as they live
so close and cramped together. I wish there were a few more scenarios that
deepen some of these relationships in Flotsam. Especially the people that live outside the
walls with those on the inside. Just like I wish I could have done better
for this place even though I know I did the best I possibly could—and that's the point,
isn't it? And that's finally the end of Chapter One. We've seen almost every outcome of almost
every choice. You will be stunned to know that I left a
lot out. I will not be able to keep up this level of
recap throughout Chapter Two because it's a far more complex tangle of choices than
what we just saw the end of this Chapter. I'm sorry to repeat myself but I hope people
understand that all of these choices and how the game reacts to your decisions are the
game for so many sections of Witcher 2, and there's no way to go through them without
showing what they all are. As you can tell I'm pretty nervous about it
and this isn't even the last time I bring up this point, I just hope anyone that has
gotten this far in the video is enjoying this and is looking forward to it continuing in
Chapter Two. After the introduction of Chapter Two we can
see that more clearly than ever because, depending on whether you went with Iorveth or Roche,
Geralt ends up in an entirely different place with an entirely different cast of characters
and mostly unique quests to do. First though we have to meet the petulant
Henselt, the King of Kaedwen, and the beautiful Saskia, Dragonslayer and the would-be Queen
of Vergen. On the way up the river Geralt doesn't just
travel farther east, he also passes through an invisible portal and unknowingly falls
through the folds of the universe. Where he lands is determined by which boat
he's traveling on. If you're with Iorveth then you will begin
this section controlling Stennis, the son of Demavend, who Letho killed in the opening
cinematic, and the current heir of the Kingdom of Aedirn. If Geralt is traveling with Roche then you
will find yourself acting as Henselt, the current ruler of the Kingdom of Kaedwen. There is a meeting about to happen between
a monarch, two would-be monarchs, and a bunch of nobles and advisors. You may think that this is just the exact
same scene that plays out with you embodying a different perspective that best aligns with
your previous choices you've made throughout the game so far. Unfortunately, no. If you're Henselt then you walk up with Dethmold
to a camp that's already occupied by the Aedirnians. You speak with some of their traitorous nobility
to try to broker a deal against Stennis without him even being present. Then Saskia the Dragonslayer shows up and
she leads the conversation against Henselt and Stennis doesn't utter a single word. But if you're with Iorveth, you could be controlling
Stennis right now. The scene begins with you walking up the same
path that Henselt does to a camp seemingly claimed and occupied by the Kaedwenis this
time. You lead the conversation and almost every
line of dialogue is completely different. Stennis has many more lines—which is infinitely
higher than zero—and the traitorous nobles are punished. Henselt speaks with much more force about
his gathered armies and, as Stennis, you can choose to betray Saskia here and try to deal
with Henselt. No matter what this ends in a fight. Saskia threatens war despite being vastly
outnumbered against Kaedwen's military. You can control Henselt in a one-on-one duel
to settle the matter or reject her offer and initiate a huge brawl. Meanwhile, if you're Stennis, a brawl is the
only option. These characters strangely inherit Geralt's
vigor talents and even have the witcher's health meter and experience bar—which I
strongly think should have been stripped away for these sections since it doesn't matter
if you win or lose. So you didn't need a UI here. If you're Henselt then you can kick Saskia's
ass and it'll still end in a draw. Saskia will be heavily injured against this
podium altar thing but only after splitting Henselt's scalp even though he grabs his cheek
in the animation. See even in cutscenes effects don't match
the character animations—heehee. If you're controlling Stennis then you can
lose or almost kill Henselt or one of his advisors—any of which triggers the same
cutscene since none of these deaths can be permanent because these characters have to
be around for the rest of the game's story. Stennis will be in Saskia's place in the cutscene
on this path and be the one to injure Henselt instead. Then, no matter which version you're on, a
priest will attempt to stop the fighting which supernaturally enrages the King into crushing
his head against the same religious podium altar thing that either Stennis or Saskia
could be resting on. This causes a curse to awaken, and it's the
exact point that we cut to Geralt arriving in the area—either with Iorveth or Roche. Do you see how dense that was with possible
changes and choices within choices, and different narrative lines becoming even more different
independently of whatever decisions you've made? Well. Welcome to Chapter Two. These are the baby steps. Let's zoom out for a second. This region is in Upper Aedirn, where that
Kingdom's border meets its northerly neighbor Kaedwen. You'll recall that Henselt is obsessed with
ruling this area and that King Demavend is dead, so it's a perfect time for a third attempt
at invading it. Just like the placement of these two kingdoms,
Chapter Two's map is split into two halves in the same way: Henselt on the northwest
chunk. Saskia and Stennis on the southeast. Their side has the dwarven city of Vergen
on it, aligning nicely with the continued theme of prejudice and human oppression since
it is largely non-humans that are fighting against Henselt's invasion. If you're on the Roche path you will be spending
the vast majority of your time on the north west military camp side. Meanwhile if you're on the Iorveth path you
will be spending the vast majority of your time in Vergen. But why is that? Why are you isolated to one half of the map? There are clearly paths that link both areas
and Henselt plans to march his army south to invade right? Hell this scene where you control either Henselt
or Stennis takes place in this middle ground. Why aren't you free to wander between them
throughout the whole chapter? Because during the previous battle for this
place something awful happened. For reasons that aren't revealed to you just
yet, in the middle of the final battle of that invasion a sorceress on Kaedwen's side
named Sabrina Glevissig summoned an immense fire storm that obliterated both armies and
permanently scarred the land with great gorges and trenches of up-heaved earth. Sabrina, far from a teenage witch, is a minor
book character and was also a part of the Witcher 1 adventure module The Price of Neutrality. She's met Geralt before which means of course
there's a romance card of her but that doesn't matter anymore. King Henselt had her burned at the stake for
committing what he considers to be an unforgivable war crime against both Kaedwen and Aedirn
when she summoned the firestorm. This spell is possibly the second most powerful
display of magic in the series performed by a lone human or elf. I'm struggling to think of any other work
of magic that is comparable—and just for some perspective: there's a legend of a sorcerer
moving a mountain because it was spoiling his view, a tower teleporting around the world,
and in the books sorceresses can fly on broomsticks but it's not given much attention as if it's
an embarrassing detail. In fact I'm still not sure if it's a joke
or not. There are the djinns in both the games and
The Lash Wish that are stronger than any human mage, but they can be enslaved and have their
power harnessed by sorcerers—which is how that mountain was moved so maybe that shouldn't
count. There is also a Notorious G.O.D-like entity
far more powerful than anyone else in the series in Witcher 3's Hearts of Stone expansion. Yennefer also impressively maintains a spell
over a gigantic area in the third game too, but I think this firestorm is still the second
most powerful spell worked by a lone mortal that we get to see. Astoundingly, Sabrina also takes the number
one spot with a spell she casts shortly after this. In what is the result of a convoluted series
of events (not criticism by the way, sometimes things are messy), Sabrina manages to cast
a high level blood curse as she dies. It's centered around punishing Henselt for
executing her and, as we soon see, the outcome is apocalyptically violent even though she
failed to cast it properly due to, well, her being stabbed a bit too much to get that blood
while she was being burned alive. Still an amazing attempt and we should always
celebrate earnest effort more than results. This curse had many moving parts to it—stages
of progression that had to come true before the big event, like the games before the cake
comes out at a birthday party. The final one of these was Henselt smashing
this priest's head into this altar, which is something I think Henselt even knew about
but he still came back here because he's more obsessed with owning this territory than video
game critics are with FROMsoftware. Or reddit with Keanu Reeves. But to his credit this flash that happens
seems to me to be part of the spell taking over him, compelling him to do this, mixed
with his fury at just taking a blow to the head. The last game is played, here's the cake,
the candles are blown out and the curse bursts to deathless life. Geralt and his chosen Husbando arrive as this
happens and the no man's land between the northern camp and southern Vergen becomes
saturated with a dense magical mist, which transports any who go through it to a hellish
nightmare—an eternal reenactment of the battle, with the soldiers of both sides already
dead but also still dying, again and again. Weapons clashing. Champions meeting. Fireballs falling. Hot takes retweeting. Forever and ever. Unfortunately, at first this twisted reality
and how it works isn't made clear at all. And everyone seems to understand it way before
you do. I think the biggest culprit here is that you
don't get to see the “supernatural transport” through the mist for yourself until Geralt
and company have already gone through it twice off camera. So the sudden change in scenery and sky in
the opening is very unintuitive because you have no context for it. To make matters worse CD Projekt forgot to
add the hellscape sky effect to this scene I think? So all the characters look up, gasping, and
then Geralt runs into the fray. And then the camera moves up to show absolutely
nothing in the sky. This isn't the only time in the game that
a texture or a model wasn't implemented properly or was forgotten about. On the Iorveth path version of this scene
a character named Yarpin proclaims “The sun's gone dark” but it hasn't. It's still clearly daylight and nothing has
changed at all. So... go figure. This is such a weird issue that I have to
be honest and say I don't even know what's missing, just that something is clearly absent. If this is meant to be the sun that's gone
in the sky, even though the light is still there, and they didn't show it in the sky
prior to the change then that's a pretty bad move imo. Here's where we have to return to our Genie
in a Bottle hypothetical from way back in Chapter Three of the Witcher 1 section. Imagine you wish to live your life again,
this time outsmarting the genie by specifically saying that you want to retain your memories
of your first go around, only to discover the asshole genie has changed other things
without your permission. Because you didn't specify. Maybe you have a sibling you didn't have the
first time. Maybe a huge historical event doesn't happen. Or maybe this time your parents love you. This second life may still be an interesting
experience, but it's far from what you wanted: a chance to see how your choices could have
had different results if every other variable remained the same. Any change is only because of you. Like how would my life had gone if I had never
played World of Warcraft? You almost certainly wouldn't be watching
this video right now because it wouldn't exist. In this scene you can see either Saskia helping
Stennis up, or Stennis helping Saskia up—depending on who you were controlling in the fight before
this, which again is determined by either choosing Iorveth or Roche in Flotsam. If you're with Iorveth then Sile de Tansarville,
who has teleported herself here to serve as an advisor for Henselt, will open a portal
through which they all escape—Dethmold included. You'll arrive just in time to save Saskia
and company from ghosts and draugs, then be saved yourself by Philippa Eilhart who swoops
in—literally—shapeshifted as an owl and projecting a magical dome just like Triss
was at the beginning of Chapter One. If you're with Roche then you will see Saskia
and company scamper away, presumably to be saved by Philippa in another location, while
Sile, Dethmold, and Henselt stand around with their collective thumbs up their collective
arse. Dethmold requires your protection to cast—not
a portal—but the same magical shield dome that Philippa and Triss use, while Sile practically
does nothing. This is not an outcome determined by cause
and effect. This is fake bullshit and, unlike some of
these types of false changes that we've seen in the past with these games, this one really
bothers me. It's so forced to make sure you end up with
the compatible side. The game isn't prepared to have you and Iorveth
stuck with the Kaedwenis, nor Roche and you stranded in Vergen. So it uses bullshit to make sure that doesn't
happen. I think those would be interesting situations
but that would mean way too many changes and possibilities to add to a game that already
has too many changes and possibilities. The solution here is to smooth out these differences
to have them make sense depending on earlier choices—like maybe having Sile be a passenger
on Roche's boat so she's not here to open this portal, but if you chose Iorveth and
started that uprising on the dock then Sile teleported herself here instead so she didn't
have to deal with that. That means she got here sooner, is already
a part of Henselt's group, so she's present in this to open this portal on the Iorveth
path but not the Roche one. Little things like this could have gone a
long way to smooth out these difference and have them make sense... cause and effect style. Witcher 2 is a game you have to play twice
in order to truly understand all of it, but then you see changes like this that crack
the continuity, which sadly only gets worse and more questionable the more decisions you
that make and the more outcomes that you see. If you're with Roche you'll find the corpse
of Prince Stennis in the battleground as you escape. You can even loot his sword. But if you're with Iorveth then Stennis survives
this scene, makes it back to Vergen and is vitally important to the main storyline that
happens there. However, before we get to all of that, I do
want to point out how well realized this battlefield is. I don't think I've seen a war between two
ghost armies look as good as this does in any other game—because you know, there are
just so many examples to think of that happening. My only nitpick is that it can be visually
overwhelming your first go through because of all of the enemies and the big dome shield
obscuring your view. You'll get more chances to better see it later
on though. This decision to end up on one side, with
its own array of characters you otherwise couldn't interact with, is almost certainly
why Triss speaks to someone else in Flotsam when she uses Sile's megascope. I'm going to guess that at one point in time
the decision to give Iorveth his sword back was the big split moment, not what came afterward,
and so this Triss conversation is introducing you to an important character you will soon
meet determined by the path you have set in motion. If you give Iorveth his sword back then you
see Philippa in this conservation, who you will see if you continue on the Iorveth path. And same for Dethmold if you went with Roche. It's just that the player can decide to go
the other way after this which makes this a little awkward and kind of forced. An example that supports this guess is that
no matter what you can tell Philippa you overheard Triss speaking to her on the megascope even
if it was Dethmold you saw on the call earlier in the playthrough. The northern camp and Roche path is the smaller
area of the two but has the most open spaces and is easier to explore. As you can see there's this field area with
a tent for the military's whoring needs and Geralt has room to run around freely. What I really like about the other paths are
that not all of its content are reflections of each other. There are different services and points of
interest on the northern path because they're trying to facilitate a war group than there
are on the south path because it's a city and they have all of their unique needs too. Which aren't found or would be unrealistic
to have in a marching army. It makes both sides feel distinct even if
there is some overlap. On the edges of this area are “tunnel-like”
paths through the surrounding highland. These lead to some important side areas, like
the site where Sabrina was burned and cast her curse. This happened years ago and it's not exactly
clear to me if this invasion happened immediately after the peace treaty with Nilfgaard was
signed in the books, or if Henselt relinquished the land and then came back a year later to
invade. Some of these narrow pathways lead to the
other side of the map and are therefore cut off by the mist. Strangely you can enter these to try to fight
your way to the other side without any magical protection. You can even fight the ghosts again but stay
there too long and the game just kills you with unavoidable ranged attacks or just casting
death through the game's console commands. Not really sure why they let you come in here
when there's nothing you can do but, eh, it's an option. On the Vergen side these narrow routes continue
with their own side areas that demand much more tedious backtracking from you. The most in the game actually. There's a long spiral path infested with harpies. A tranquil forest area that's larger than
the equivalent thicket on the northern side. Both of which have monsters to kill. What the south side lacks in an open area
to explore it makes up with having a much, MUCH larger town for NPCs to hang out in. This is practically another Flotsam and its
layout is way more difficult to understand. I like how many overlapping pathways it has,
with vertical routes as well as standard walkways and that the streets have layers to them instead
of all being on one flat plane, but I do have to wonder if the game's map system fails to
make this as easy to navigate as it should be. I still sometimes have trouble finding Phillipa's
house and I've probably spent close to 20 hours running around Vergen across all of
my playthroughs. Maybe some clearer landmarks could have worked
in some of the side sections of the city, which right now some of them bleed together
and look very alike—I think a lesson to take from Vergen is that just because a game
has a map doesn't mean that's enough for navigation to be solved, or that having players check
it regularly and interrupt themselves is ideal. This is a lesson that I think was beautifully
learned for Novigrad in Witcher 3. Both sides in Chapter Two of Witcher 2 have
their pseudo-dungeons, but Vergen's are much larger. In general the south side has much more developed
content than the north side and I wonder if that's on purpose or not, or if they ran out
of time to finish the northern side. It definitely doesn't feel incomplete though,
but who knows. Thankfully, despite the quests being so different
on each side, you do eventually cross the mist no matter what story path you're following
and get a chance to explore the other half, albeit in a very limited way. The difference is most quests and characters
are exclusive to their side. When you explore the war camp or inner Vergen
as the opposing side, you don't have the freedom to speak to people or do their quests, since
you are an invader. You're either stealthing or fighting. It's by far the most interesting thing in
the entire series and if you haven't played the game you might be surprised to learn that
this split in the narrative continues into Chapter Three. There are many moments that the different
threads meet back again and then wave out in different directions, but I don't recall
another game that allows a player choice to make this extreme of a departure. Or anywhere close to this, actually. Even in games like Mass Effect and the more
recent Disco Elysium—there are many choices and differences to discover based on your
actions, but they are lots of smaller to moderate impacts like throwing a fistful of stones
into a stream and watching the ripples. Witcher 2 is like diverting the damned thing. Unfortunately, in the words of my first girlfriend,
impressive and interesting doesn't always mean something is good. Or was the correct choice. And this is especially true after you see
both routes and notice more of those troubling differences that make you start to wonder
if all makes sense. The complexity of the narrative and the staggering
amount of characters certainly helps to mask this from you but after seeing these routes
several times I have to wonder how successful CD Projekt was with this experiment, even
though I want to make it clear that I'm really, really happy they made this game. Like I said earlier Witcher 2 is my least
favorite of these three games but it is definitely the most unique. It's worth studying if you want to see the
potential and pitfalls of video game narratives with choices that actually matter. Let's get on with it though: I need to summarize
both sides in a lot fewer words than I've used so far and then we can discuss the important
bits. Nevertheless this is still a big chunk of
story to go through, on both sides, so wish us luck. First up is the Roche route. Henselt is grateful to Geralt. He doesn't believe he killed Foltest. In fact he wants Geralt's help to break the
curse on him and the surrounding area so he can continue his war march. Sile is also in the camp but she doesn't play
much of a role until later in the chapter—her presence is important to know though. It's Dethmold of all people you'll be working
with. Roche retracts to his tent outside the Kaedweni
camp and becomes a bit distant from you. Ves is also here and it's naturally important
for me to point out that you have the option of sleeping with her in this chapter. Breaking both curses requires several concurrent
investigations. You need to search the site where Sabrina
was burned and visit a priest that has devoted his life to her as a martyr—who I believe
also turns out to be an ex-soldier and the one who stabbed her, providing her with access
to blood for her curse but was overzealous and made her bleed too much. I always thought it was near to a plothole
that Henselt never had this guy executed too. It seems impossible to me that a king this
petty would let this go. It resulted in a botched execution and a curse
and he's still alive somehow. Regardless the priest has kept the fire of
Sabrina's burning alive as a religious symbol, which I choose to believe means he lit something
on fire from the stake itself, protected that fire until he got to his new home, and has
kept that same fire fed and burning all this time. Unlikely of course but it's a cool idea so
I'm going with it. It's equally likely that this guy is a con-artist
and is using his small claim to fame to make money. He doesn't really seem to care that Sabrina's
damnation has finally manifested after all. You also have to uncover a mutiny in Henselt's
ranks which is linked with square coins that were part of Sabrina's prophetic curse “these
things shall come to pass” to your doom sort of thing. Confronting the leaders of these traitors
requires you to befriend some soldiers that are in on the conspiracy via one of two possible
side quests, and then use their information to visit the brothel tent to say a password
to someone called Whistling Wendy. Who I believe comes back in Witcher 3 but
doesn't recognize Geralt for some reason. You then kill the conspirators and acquire
a piece of armor from a champion who fought in the same battle that Sabrina brought to
an end, which is conveniently a candidate as an item important enough to be linked to
the curse in order to break it. Unfortunately there are some items you need
that can only come from the Vergen side. Dethmold prepares a magical trinket for you
that allows safe passage if you don't dawdle. Zoltan just so happens to speak to you on
your way across, since he mysteriously hopped on the Blue Stripes ship after saving Iorveth
in Flotsam. Somehow. Whereas if you go with Iorveth he stays with
them and ends up in Vergen right from the start. Zoltan asks if you have anything to drink
and Geralt magically always does, which I'm sorry I have to stop and point out. I know it's a tiny thing and most of you won't
care but having to be prepared for interactions like this and keep your inventory stocked
with stuff like food and booze was a cute requirement in Witcher 1 that I ended up enjoying. Sure it doesn't really matter but Witcher
2 just waving its hands and summoning this for you instead doesn't exactly break my heart
but it puts a little fracture in it at least. A tiny bit of the soul of the series left
with this change and I'd be remiss if I didn't point that out. Zoltan decides he'd rather be on the dwarven
city side of this conflict and who can blame him. Dandelion, on the other hand, remains on the
Kaedweni side because he's gotten himself wrapped up in that conspiracy despite Geralt's
advice to be like Jackie Chan and stay free of trouble. You need three things from the Vergen side:
a banner from the nearby crypt, a sword that was used in the battle, and the head of the
spear that was used to stab Sabrina on the stake which that priest gambled away. Again he's probably a charlatan. This visit also means that no matter your
choices you get to have a long conversation with Yarpen Zigrin, a character from Geralt's
past who recalls an event from the book Blood of Elves when Geralt looked after Triss while
she was suffering from dysentery. They were all traveling in a group along with
a younger Ciri. You should try to remember Yarpen because
he'll be relevant when we speak about the books hours into the Witcher 3 section of
this series. Isn't it fun that things like that come out
of my mouth for these videos? You get the spearhead from a game of dice
with another dwarf nearby who collects relics. Getting the sword is trickier and requires
the help of Zoltan, since Geralt is not allowed to enter inner Vergen because he's on the
opposing side. This is a limit of the medium that doesn't
bother me too much but it would make sense to have the option to switch sides here. Ironically it's the choices provided by the
video game medium that make choices like this difficult to manage. Switching sides here is a lot more natural
of a choice, and a lot less arbitrary, than the dilemma you had earlier with giving Iorveth
his sword back. And yet it's not even entertained as an option
because it would just be too difficult to account for all these choices and possibilities. The strength of the medium ends up being a
limitation that we're not ready to solve yet, and may never be. Here it makes the story awkward because Geralt
obviously has a history with Yarpen. Triss has been seen in this area more than
on the northern side. And now BFF Zoltan is fighting for Vergen
too. On top of this you'll soon be meeting with
Saskia herself—which is a surprise Zoltan didn't bargain for when he went in to beg
for the sword—and she seems to be much more in-line with Geralt's ideology than anyone
on Henselt's side... including Roche. He can claim to remain neutral all he wants
but he still picks sides. A detail that could explain this is that Geralt
is still trying to clear his name of being a Kingslayer, but this is another problem
in of itself since on both paths (as we'll soon see) he can commit more and more to being a criminal. Saskia gives over the sword willingly—with
her happy blessing even—since she believes they can emerge victorious no matter how much
Geralt might warn her about the strength of Henselt's army. So she wants the curse lifted as much as Henselt
does and this is a reversal of something that can happen on the Iorveth path. It's important to take note that Saskia is
… alive for this conversation. Alert and conscious. Radiant even. I know it sounds weird but you'll understand
shortly. With all the necessary ingredients to break
the curse, you make a solo crossing back to the Kaedweni side only to find Roche up in
arms about something. Apparently someone else emerged from the mist
just before you did, and they made their way to the small but separate Nilfgaardian camp
at the rear of Henselt's. Remember Shilard from the Prologue? He was here for a bit and you speak to him
before your official meeting with the King at the beginning of this Chapter. Now he's sailing away up river to a place
called Loc Muinne (Which sounds like the noise a racecar makes when it drives by real fast:
Lock Mween). Apparently whoever it was that crossed from
the Vergen side had a small statue of Triss in their possession, which is I believe the
first time the games use magic that's called artifact compression. Surprisingly, this is from the books. Although in them it's Yennefer that gets shrunk
and frozen, suitable for her like a chunk of ice. Witcher 3 uses it a handful of times too. Geralt deduces it's the real Triss and that
she's been captured by Nilfgaard. He wants to follow them but Roche—and therefore
his only access to a boat—can't leave until everything here, with the curse and the battle,
is settled. Roche insists they cannot risk attracting
the wrath of Henselt by bailing on him. Which is a hilarious detail in hindsight. You meet with the King and explain to him
that they have to do a small re-enactment of Sabrina's execution to break the personal
level of the curse that's on him. A rune must be drawn at the site of her stake
burning. Henselt must stab her spirit with the spearhead. And then Geralt has to kill some ghosts. This rune is drawn using a diagram you get
from Dethmold and an unspecified “magic powder” that we have to hope isn't fisstech. You can shamefully mess this up as many times
as you like and even trial-and-error spam your way through it. Like I said this only removes the personal,
localized curse placed on Henselt. The curse on the battlefield is a whole separate
thing and is next to be dealt with but it requires something from the King himself as
the final piece to run in and cleanse the land. Henselt wants to meet in the evening and mysteriously
won't talk to you before then. This is because the game has a time sensitive
event that happens when you come back: two assassins attack the camp and attempt to kill
the king. You fight them off, killing one and forcing
the other to retreat. Turns out, just like the assassin from the
ending cinematic in Witcher 1, they are both witchers. Despite Sile's protests against the abomination
that is necromancy, Dethmold lives up to his name and decides to cast an illegal magic
spell in conjunction with a potion Geralt mixes, to re-live the recent memories of the
slain assassin. This reveals the nearby hideout of Letho and
his creed of assistant-assassins which is a place you could have found before this but
it's only now that you can get it open. It also reveals why Sile was so against the
spell: she's been working with the assassins and is even the one who ordered them to kill
Demavend—she's behind the assassination we see in this cinematic. By the way this memory flashback loves to
glitch out and fail for no reason. Good luck getting it done in one attempt and
make sure to buy a lottery ticket if you do. You then go to their hideout yourself in the
present to see the surviving assassin is close to death because Sile came here to silence
him before he could talk and did a poor job of it. His name is Serrit and he's actually a friend
of Geralt's. So is Auckes, the other witcher that died
outside Henselt's tent. Like the situation with Letho, Geralt knows
these guys and even traveled with them a while ago. He just doesn't remember but they do. All they had to say was a few key words and
they could have talked this out but nope, Geralt accidentally kills a friend and causes
the death of another because they're stupid. Tragically this conversation triggers another
memory recall for our witcher and he comes very close to remembering his time with Letho
and the gang right after directly killing one and indirectly killing another. For now he only remembers his Hunt for the
Wild Hunt. Now, assuming you have all the necessary pieces,
you're finally free to dive into the mist and lift the curse spreading out from no man's
land. I just want to quickly point out that some
of the steps we just went through can be done in a slightly different order and I'm also
skipping over side quests. This time entering the mist begins a series
of setpieces. Inside the blighted battlefield you possess
multiple soldiers from both sides of the conflict, re-living moments of the war and the deaths
of many of these people. I wonder if Geralt himself experiences much
more of this than we see—off camera and separately from us. Does he jump through every participant here
on this day and we only see a few of them? Either way you have plenty of combat as these
soldiers who do not have Geralt's witcher abilities and so you'll be doing parries and
counterattacks for most of it. So for me this was going from Aard Mode to
Hard Mode. There's a section where you have to use cover
to get through a trench while a ceiling of arrows continually comes down on you. There's a boss fight against a bigger version
of a draugir which has some poor looking tracking attacks. Thankfully you're Geralt again for this one
and can aard him down. I'm really not sure what CD Projekt expected
you to do here. In fact many of the fights in this game reek
of this idea that the testers already knew what to do so they were just going through
the motions and weren't really experimenting all that much to see what new players would
do and to respond and adjust for those mistakes. Many of his moves are poorly telegraphed,
some are difficult to understand what's even happening, and he goes into awkward defensive
states that punish attacks. While aard can definitely help it's not necessary
and he's best dealt with by spamming your way through his armor. You get to see Sabrina convene with the Lodge
of Sorceresses before she summons the firestorm that has ruined this land, revealing that
they were behind her decision to stop the battle but warned they could not support her
if it goes badly afterward. Like a witchy spy. And then you get to see that destruction happen
after the draug fight although it's hard to tell because the land is already devastated
through the lens of the curse that you're in. The final scene is Henselt condemning Sabrina
for her actions, bringing the story of this land to a horrific full circle. And could perhaps be the moment that some
players reach full understanding of the story because a lot of these details aren't presented
to you in a straightforward way throughout this chapter. So this could be a big juicy story moment
for that, and it's easy to forget that if you've already played the game I think. Geralt is found unconscious after this and
he remains that way for three days. Another memory comes back to him while he's
under, showing that Geralt saved Letho from death by fighting off a slyzard that had him
laid out. He had two other witchers with him, who are
of course Serrit and Auckes, and the four were together for a while as a traveling party,
Fellowship of the Ring style. Or Fellowship of the Witcher Books style because
there's a group in those stories that are just like this. Which means if we jump back a couple of days... Whoops. He's not going to be in Witcher 3. In the three days that have passed, Henselt
and Dethmold have readied for war and begun their southward march. Your first goal is to find Roche for some
reason, and you track him down to a house on the coast where it's revealed he's behind
the conspiracy against Henselt. That's why he was being distant with Geralt
after arriving and might be another reason why he wanted to stick around to see the end
of all this. Together you go to what remains of Henselt's
camp (to find the Villain of Henselt's Camp) and discover that the entire unit of Blue
Stripes have been rounded up and executed for treason, along with the other traitors
in Henselt's army. You fight some of the men you were just on
the same side as and I find it strange here that you're not being proclaimed as a hero
for breaking the curse and given the opportunity to just walk away. Not that that should be an actual story option
that you can follow of course—nor would Geralt take it—but a line addressing the
fact that these men should be idolizing Geralt maybe just little bit and don't want to fight
him but you stick with Roche anyway and go for it. I know witchers are often used and discarded
after services are rendered but this is a particularly high profile case that will likely
have ballads sang about it so... this seems odd to me and I suspect doesn't make full
sense. Even Dethmold and Henselt don't say a word
of thanks or try to offer something to bring Geralt to their side. He would be a valuable ally in this battle—after
all he also helped uncover the conspiracy and isn't married to Roche. Yet. Ves is the only survivor of the group of Blue
Stripes that came to Vergen and will throw herself into Geralt's embrace whether they
slept together or not—whether you even spoke to her at all, actually. She explains that Henselt forced himself onto
her and that's the only reason she survived. When she leaves Geralt tells Roche that Ves
is lying and this is never explained or resolved or brought up again. Ever. I have no idea what it means and Henselt more
than confirms what he did to Ves himself a little later. So it can't be about that. I have no idea what this lie is. So now the goal is revenge against Henselt
and to also track down Sile, who we now know is behind the assassinations. Both are apparently in Vergen where a battle
is raging. You travel with Roche. You fight through the trenches and tunnels. You scare away Dethmold who can fling unavoidable
spells at you—even with the upgraded dodge—from behind an impenetrable energy barrier and
then just jumps in a portal after you kill all of his underlings. You can also visit Iorveth and rescue him
from a group of soldiers as they fight in the city. In what is quite possibly the most impressive
minor change in the game, maybe even in the whole series for this type of really tiny
consequence that most developers wouldn't have bothered to do or even think of but it's
still here, Iorveth has different dialogue lines if you gave him his sword back in Flotsam
but then went with Roche. If you had him captured then he is much colder
to you and proclaims that the battle isn't over, he'll never give up. But if you helped him in Flotsam he's initially
friendly with you and then much more defeated and emotional—he's about to give up his
fight and is taking the loss hard. Like someone realizing that I was right about
Super Mario Odyssey all along. This is the first time you'll see Iorveth
on the Roche route since Flotsam. It'll also be the last time you ever see him
at all in the games if this is your only playthrough. So do you see what I mean? Roche could have killed him in that interaction
at the end of Chapter 1 and it would have really made no difference. Zoltan is here too and he almost lunges at
you with his axe. I don't believe you see Saskia in this section,
although there is another funny “Roche is a screw up” moment when he runs across a
bridge and takes a tumble. Despite how the game presents it on the screen here, going to Iorveth isn't an exclusive
choice. You have time to see him and then go to Philippa's
house for the finale with no repercussions that I ever saw. But if you go to the house first then it's
over and you don't get to see the other choice. Sile is inside like she's been waiting for
you to open the door before teleporting away. Geralt doesn't even try to stop her. Then Henselt appears, threatening Geralt without
a word of thanks for breaking the curse and I don't think any justification for why he's
suddenly out for witcher blood. This fight is terrible because of the bewildering
decision to make two of the four knights invincible shield guardians. You may think this is so you can't attack
Henselt and therefore break the game but no, they all join in the fight eventually. Including Henselt. And you can hit him too. Roche shows up after your victory and, after
some back and forth, you have a choice. Talk Roche down or let him follow his rage
and kill Henselt, avenging both his Blue Stripes and Ves. Once again I'd like to point out that Witcher
2 is not without a heavy smashing of irony. The only way Henselt can die in this game
is if he wins his war for Vergen and the lands of Upper Aedirn that he's coveted for decades. Just like Loredo can only survive if the Scoia'tael
are chosen and he takes that loss. The Blue Stripes are only rounded up and hanged
if Geralt chooses to help them in Flotsam. And Roche can become a Kingslayer here. I would argue that Geralt does too as he stands
by and watches, complicit. The desperate quest to find the Kingslayer
can lead them to becoming that themselves. And suddenly Letho's actions a little more
understandable. This feels like the right thing to do, the
cathartic and justified choice, but is it? Henselt's death would probably cause more
harm than good as his kingdom is destabilized because just like Foltest he doesn't have
an heir. He's definitely the most Henry the Eighth
of all the kings. But there's also the further thought that
being unwilling to punish kings for crimes is just perpetuating that idea—that they're
too important, too big to fail, bring too much stability that it becomes justified again
and again to let crimes go. But if the precedent was set that: no, rulers
are not above the law—and sure that's going to make thing pretty bad for much longer than
if we just let him live—in the even longer run that could mean less suffering. As you can probably tell this is of the only
choices in Witcher 2 that I find difficult to decide. And of those few I think it's the hardest. As much as I love Henselt's final words: I think I appreciate more what Geralt says
if you let Henselt live. “You had a choice: kill the defenseless
Henselt or battle yourself. You chose the tougher opponent and won.” How neutral of him. I always feel bad for Roche here. It feels so much like he's out of his depth
and lost in the world. Kind of like Geralt in the first game. He's a bullheaded asshole to be sure but I
can't help but like him. The two leave together to Loc Muinne and that's
the end of the Roche path in Chapter Two. So there's still a whole other path to go. Did you forget about that? Which means it's rewind time. And this year, we control rewind. Here's what happens if you go with Iorveth instead. When you arrive at Henselt's camp with Roche
you are given a tour by a guard and then dumped at the inner gate. Vergen has a dwarf counterpart of this interaction
but it ends with a much warmer welcome and you being assigned a room at the tavern. It also sets a precedent for this version
of the chapter: talking to dwarves. Many dwarves. Often. For very long conversations while drinking,
when you can't really be sure if they're mad at each other or not, or just being friendly. They really nailed those parts of the Scottish. We can draw another reflected version of the
Roche path with Saskia. Henselt was afflicted with a targeted curse
in addition to the one Sabrina used to damn the region. On Iorveth's path you still need to lift that
larger curse but the more focused ailment is on Saskia. This starts when you attend a war meeting
and feel very out of place. Philippa Eilhart is backing Saskia's bid to
create a new independent nation in the region—Upper Aedirn or the Pontar Valley, separate from
both Kaedwen and the rest of Aedirn. She will rule this new queendom as a benevolent
monarch although for reasons we will soon see it's not clear if that's a title she truly
wants or not. She is able to launch this campaign because
she has won the hearts of the lower classes for three reasons:
1) speaking on their behalf, genuinely wanting to improve their lives, getting top marks
in economic classes, and uniting them against the upper classes that are exploiting them. 2) She's incredibly charismatic and beautiful
and has earned the adoration of humans, dwarves, and even elves—who typically find human
women disgusting. 3) And perhaps most important: she has apparently
killed a dragon. Saskia the Dragonslayer is her title that's
thrown about quite a bit. Although good luck finding anyone apart from
Iorveth who can confirm that feat outside of “there was a dragon, now it's gone and
Saskia says she's the reason why.” In this meeting there's a toast and Saskia
is poisoned so badly that she becomes sleeping beauty. Your job is to collect the right reagents
for Philippa to create a cure, and maybe sniff around to see who did the poisoning. In this way this is both the reflected personal
curse on Henselt, and the conspiracy plot against him. Turns out that Stennis is responsible, although
that's never confirmed with 100% certainty because of the Uncertain Truths Nightmare
Analysis Monster. Remember that on this path Stennis does not
die in no man's land. He survives the trek back to Vergen and lives
to scheme another day—although it'll be up to your choices to determine how long that
lasts. Philippa is the equivalent of Dethmold on
this path and she does not live alone. She shares her house with a “leashed”
sorceress apprentice, which even she admits is an unfortunately loaded term considering
the two are in a relationship. You walk in on them being intimate two times
as you're coming and going fetching the necessary components for Saskia's cure and to break
Sabrina's curse. Philippa claims she's always hard at work
magically scanning the area but it felt to me that she decided Geralt was to be her bitch
along with her apprentice. Her name is Cynthia by the way and, in addition
to her being a really cool dancer (yes I just hit you with a Rugrats reference), there's
a reason other than titillation that these scenes happen. Which is a good thing because despite what
I said about Triss's sex scene earlier, I think these ones with Philippa would be gratuitous
and unnecessary otherwise. For the cure for Saskia you'll need a flower
from the bottom of the nearby mines, which means you need to go through a protracted
dungeon crawl with a group of dwarves—including Zoltan and his perverted friend Sheldon Skaggs. It's hard to overstate how much time you can spend talking to dwarves on this route. Well over an hour, with some of them all on
their own taking upwards of ten minutes. I like the commitment to dwarves being big
talkers that like to spin tales but Vergen already suffers from “dialogue fatigue”
without these guys dwarf-piling on the issue. It also doesn't help that fighting through this mine is room after room after room of
low visibility rotfiend rumbles that explode upon death. The dwarf group makes it more difficult for
you by getting in the way, blocking your spells, randomly being inactive, and causing the enemy
hit cones to become even more unhinged than usual. Another ingredient for the cure is a power
source to fuel Philippa's spell. Apparently the local harpies create chunks
of tappable energy through snatching dreams and crystallizing them, which is a romantic
idea that I really like. To get one of these you first head north of
the town, where you can also pick up the same war banner from the same crypt that you explore
in the Roche path. But it turns out these crystals aren't strong
enough and you have to delve into a Iorveth-route exclusive area at the bottom of the harpy
quarry: where they have bigger nests and have stolen bigger dreams. You can even view some of them while you're
there: a dream from Letho and Iorveth. Two dwarves, one of which is involved in a
side quest. And the dream of a dragon which is the one
Philippa ends up using for her spell. Along the way you can speak to some of Iorveth's
elves and even the big man himself. If you saved the elven women at the end of
Chapter Two then one of them will be here in Vergen and is willing to open a shortcut
for you to get around the area much faster which is surprisingly handy. That's not all she'll open either, as we can
see in one of the more awkward sexual encounters in the game. She is the one who brings it up first and
suggestions it but even Geralt is put off by how … transactional she is about it. You can also sleep with a succubus in this
version of Chapter Two which means I have to reveal I was wrong about this game being
my least favorite in the trilogy. It's actually my favorite game of all time. I sure hope that showing this scene doesn't
make this video be DEMONetized. This happens in a side quest that's also linked
to Iorveth's people in a way that doesn't make any sense. An elf thinks a monster is killing people
and puts up a notice. Turns out it's really him doing it but he's
trying to make it appear like the succubus because he's madly in love with her and that's
turned into a deadly obsession so he... wants... her... dead. She's an unfaithful succubus, (what's the
opposite of an oxymoron?) like the scorpion on the back of the frog, and you can either
go along with it and kill her or figure out the truth. The problem is this elf arrived in Vergen
the same time you did. Which means this quest makes less sense than
the first twenty hours of Death Stranding. He's barely had enough time to fall in love with the succubus, never mind watch multiple
others couple with her, kill several of them, have them staged like monster slayings and
buried in the tomb, and then set up the notice and get Geralt on it. It's like he did a speedrun of Jack the Ripper's
career. We'll see more evidence in Witcher 3 that
CD Projekt does a poor job at factoring the passage of time when it comes to quests and
stories. Which is weird because this is a tough issue
to address in video games because of all the player freedom but I still think they did
an excellent job with it in Witcher 1. Iorveth is involved in the “good” ending
of this quest and around this time has some really important lines of dialogue regarding
many things in the game. He's become more open with you and that's
even shown visually by him revealing his missing eye that he's kept covered until now. The thing I want to point out while we're
here is that he bemoans how much Roche is a worthy adversary—how relentless he is
at causing him and his Scoia'tael trouble. He even says: “The longer he is active,
the better he gets. I must put an end to it.” Which makes him letting Roche go in Flotsam
all the more bewildering. Iorveth even directly contradicts that here:
These kinds of issues aren't a good thing of course, but considering just how many different
narrative threads and possibilities there are in this game, I think most of them are
excusable. Some are stranger than others though. For example you can search for Triss on the
Vergen side, following the story a dwarf tells you about her falling out of the sky. This leads you to speaking to a troll, then
following that story to his pissed off troll wife who left him because he liked Triss so
much. See it's like Shrek again: Shrek and Fiona. This in turn makes you run into a mercenary
captain named Adam Pangratt, who has been sent by Sile to kill Letho and anyone else
traveling with him—meaning Triss. This is how you start to piece together that
Sile was working with the Kingslayers on Iorveth's side of the story since there's no assassin
corpse to magically jump into here. It's also another big unexplainable difference
between the routes since Sile ordered Adam and his men to do this before the meeting
with Henselt at the beginning of the Chapter. They're stuck on this side in this version
because of that. Whereas in Roche's path they're in Henselt's
camp even though Sile should have given the same orders and the same result should have
happened. Adam will even happily arm wrestle Geralt while you're here. He's also one of those “he's a book character,
really?” characters that are from the books and make
you say, really? Completing this quest, which ends fruitlessly,
seems to be the trigger for a big event in Vergen. You report back to Philippa who staunchly
refuses to accept that Sile would try to have Triss Merigold killed. You should note this figurine on the desk
behind Philippa by the way. It's important. After this back and forth there's a big commotion
in the streets. One of the ingredients needed to heal Saskia
is a few drops of blood from a royal source. This is a time when one of those romantic,
emotional rules of this world comes into play since it has to be of a true royal source,
an active royal source, not just someone related to a royal bloodline. Stennis is princely enough to count but he
refuses to give any of his blood to help Saskia. For this reason, and many others, the peasants
of Vergen have decided he must be the one behind Saskia's poisoning. They've gathered in a mob and want to kill
him. Which is, shockingly, something that you can
let happen. You can even encourage it and then scoop up
some of his blood afterward to use in the cure. It's quite a funny moment actually as Geralt
just kneels down and is like don't mind me just getting some blood, and just scoops it
up and then leaves. In contrast to that, there's something particularly
brutal about this death scene that gets me. Maybe it's just how quickly the rioting people
turn to violence and that the man is beaten to death, soaked and drowned in his own blood,
instead of the quick deaths that I'm used to in video games from magic and explosions
and swords and gunshots. You also see it instead of cutting away. If you want to save him then you'll need to
do some investigating, although it may lead you to an uncomfortable answer. Surprisingly, Iorveth wants to help since
he values the stability and support that Stennis's presence will bring to the upcoming battle,
which means it's no wonder Iorveth is such an accomplished fighter since every strike
he lands is a hippo-crit. He fears a riot started now, while Saskia
is unconscious, might spiral out of control. Here's where it gets really weird in terms
of gameplay system: there are four or five groups of NPCs standing in this hallway and
speaking to three sets of them causes the impromptu trial to begin. You can get information from two of them,
speak to some other NPCs that do not “count” toward this trigger, leave and do hours and
hours of sleuthing and interrogating and dice poker and sleeping with people and other quests,
and nothing will happen here unless you speak to a third group. But what's also weird is that it takes a long
time to do all of this investigating outside of this hallway so, a lot of time passing
is canon but still speaking to some people here causes that to pass really quickly...
it's, it's so strange. And there's little in the way of warning for
why this would cause the situation to progress. You can also speak to Stennis the Menace himself
who is both too arrogant to accept the judgement of a peasant rabble but also too honorable
to flee from them. The secret to this poisoning is that one of
the chalices was replaced with a replica that had hollow sections inside for toxins to preemptively
be placed before the wine was poured which is why Saskia was the only one effected. Your investigation heavily implicates one
of Stennis's underlings but it's never confirmed if Stennis was also involved—although that
seems to be the case. Either way the decision that leads to the
most long term good is to calm the rioters and let Stennis live. I do want to point out the possibility that
I missed some other options here since this game is so dense with choices and I can't
check them all on the wiki because it's a dirty dirty liar. I also want to say that I think it's absolutely
god damn ridiculous that you still cannot get any royal blood from Stennis after this. He's taken away to a nearby prison cell to
await Saskia's judgement when she awakens and there's still no way to force a few drops,
or a line of dialogue that makes him provide some blood as a way to appease his accusers. Honestly given what Philippa has planned here
it's close to a plothole that she doesn't storm into the prison and siphon some prince
blood herself like a vampiric owl. (I wonder if Shammy would be into that)
I'm harping on about this because the option to get the blood from Stennis was already
included if he dies. Not much would have to change. But it's made quadruply ridiculous by how
you do get royal blood if Stennis lives: Henselt. You go back to Philippa's house to find her
whipping Cynthia on the bed. Welcome back to anyone who was tabbed out
and just listening to this instead of watching. Apparently while doing this she's also picked
up a weak signal of Triss—she's on the other side of the mist! Maybe in the Kaedweni camp! It's hard for her to know for sure because
the mist disrupts her megascope. The thing is Triss has been sitting on her
desk this whole time, hidden in that weird looking statue figurine. Cynthia is a Nilfgaardian agent and has Philippa
wrapped around at least three of her fingers and maybe a thumb too. This is why these scenes aren't pure softcore
pornography in retrospect, which is a great payoff for how Philippa told Triss to stop
thinking with her vagina in Flotsam. She's been duped even harder by this distraction
and so might have you. I think she says something similar about sex
clouding the minds of those she deems beneath her in the books as well. Despite her youthful appearance, Philippa
is likely the oldest living human sorceress and definitely the oldest we see in the games. I believe she's been alive for over 300 years
which means she has about 200 on Yennefer and Geralt. No witcher has ever died of old age so it
could be that the mutations make them just as functionally immortal as mages, although
Vesemir clearly shows that not all signs of aging can be avoided. In the books however even ancient “possibly
older than Kaer Morhen itself” Vesemir is described as being at a level of fitness and
health that any youngster could envy. Philippa's greatly extended life experience
and arrogance makes Cynthia's ruse all the more satisfying. Even for me because as much as I enjoy Philippa's
character she is an o-word horrible person—which you will soon see proof of. Cynthia found Triss first, shrank her down
via an artifact compression spell, and then hid her within the figurine on the desk. The figurine itself has no magical shielding
properties since Geralt will soon find it completely intact on Henselt's side. And I seriously doubt that Cynthia could mask
this presence from Philippa who is still capable of picking up Triss's presence through at
least a kilometer of Sabrina's misty curse. Furthermore Philippa is worried Dethmold will
sense her when they reach the other side. So my only conclusion is that Philippa is
so lazy that she didn't bother scanning for Triss until now and it was after Cynthia handed
the figurine off to a spy to take it through the mist. Or that Cynthia kept distracting her from
doing the scanning spell which seems incredibly unlikely to me considering Philippa needs
Triss to get the rose of remembrance she has to cure Saskia—she's not looking for Triss
just for Geralt. It's a contrivance to be sure, but an unwelcome
one. This is also the only reason you cross the
mist if you get the blood from Stennis. If you don't then Philippa gives you the task
and I have to wonder how the hell she expects you to pull that off and why it's a more reasonable
approach than forcing Stennis. Either way you find the spy that Cynthia sent—dead
next to the curse's exit. For no reason I can tell Geralt decides to
pocket the weird looking figurine that he has no idea holds Triss inside. Then Roche appears and, similar to the interaction
you have on his path when returning from Vergen, he explains some Nilfgaardians emerged from
the curse before you did. Except this time it's slightly different for
no reason. Remember, on this path you snubbed Roche in
Flotsam. He'll still help you however—in multiple
ways. First is giving you two possible paths to
get to the Nilfgaardian camp, one of which is through the Henselt-Conspiracy Dungeons
which are mysteriously empty on the Iorveth-Line. Once at the camp you are forced to give up
your weapons with no way of refusing and finding another way, or fighting. Which I think is a bit shit. Doubly shit actually because this is one of
those times that the games forget that Geralt has magic power signs (he's practically a
mini-sorcerer) that, depending on your leveling options, might be more powerful than your
sword swings. But this is also the game that won't let you
dodge roll unless you have a weapon in your hands. Even when in combat and using your fists--you still can't roll. This is a problem with making a character
as powerful as a witcher—the only true way to disarm one is to literally disarm them,
by cutting off their arms. Shilard explains you have inadvertently brought
Triss right to him and that he's sailing up river to Loc Muinne now, which gives the third
chapter much better context than you get on Roche's path. If you haven't picked up on it by now, Shilard
is the baaaaaaaaad guy, duh. This is also how you learn that Cynthia is
working for them (Sorry I'm actually a big Billie Eilish fan for real). You're then about to be executed, are saved
by Roche, and have a narrative split moment. If you need royal blood here then Roche, in
a god-like display of bro-dom that forever bromotes him to being called Broche, still
helps you. After giving Iorveth his sword back and bailing
on their Flotsam plan, he still helps you get close to a King for the questionable reason
of acquiring some blood. Henselt goes along with this which is something that's only surprising at first. Geralt explains it's necessary to get rid
of the curse and for the battle for the region to be fought, which Henselt desperately wants
to happen. The King even turns around for this and then has Geralt
escorted out of the camp safely, not arrested. This was apparently the easier option than going to Stennis IN PRISON. If you don't need the blood then it's Geralt's
turn to be a fake hostage. You guide the two of you through Henselt's
camp with the awkward task of avoiding military officers which may not be all that clear to
you. I believe this is the last time you will see
Broche in this game on this route, but he does come back in Witcher 3 no matter what. Iorveth does not. After you're out of the camp you can either
explore all the optional areas on this side of the chapter or go back through the mist
with a fuming Philippa WHO can't believe what's happened. Let's just say she's more than a bit ruffled
about being played by her leashed apprentice. Her head is practically spinning from it and
nothing about it is a hoot. Back in Vergen it turns out Cynthia fled so
quickly that she left behind the rose of remembrance—and also conveniently searched Triss's belongings
before shrinking her and decided it was important enough to take then but not important enough
to take when she left Vergen. Apparently the rose is close to dead and they're
running out of time to use it, which makes Philippa immediately going to sleep after
this really funny. We're almost done now: Philippa prepares the
cure with a very involved performance. Which is when one of the most infamous lines
in the game happens with the sleeping beauty kiss of awakening: Again, there's a reason for this. It's not that bad. Okay it's still pretty bad. Saskia mostly recovers after this and you're
given the same sword you needed to break the curse on Henselt's side. A couple of the other items that you weren't
able to get are just supplied to you by Philippa which feels a bit crap if you do the Roche
path first but it cuts down on the otherwise longer Vergen story. I have to wonder when she had the time to
get these though if Cynthia was keeping her so preoccupied. Breaking Sabrina's curse is identical to the
Roche version so let's not go over it again. Of course you have a different entry and exit
point, and also a more powerful revelation when Philippa shows up in the curse section
at the end. You have been involved with her on this path
so now you will have questions for her because of this which doesn't happen on the Roche
side. Geralt still recovers some of his memories
and is unconscious for what appears to be the same three days since Henselt is about
to attack Vergen just like he was when Geralt woke up from the same coma on the Roche path. Philippa reveals she's helping Saskia because
she wants to make a better world—one without monarch monsters like Henselt who commit crimes
against people like Sabrina. And yet Philippa specifically told Geralt
not to kill Henselt when he went for the royal blood. There's a reason for this that we haven't
learned yet so it's not a plothole but it's still a problem because Geralt should call
her out on it here. Philippa is telling the truth here about wanting
to shape a better world. Or at least this is consistent with the reason
why she founded the Lodge of Sorceresses in the books, of which Triss and Yennefer were
both members. Geralt knew that too but he just doesn't remember. This isn't just book knowledge either since
many people in Witcher 1, both kings and commoners in the streets, will speak to you about the
Lodge. Philippa isn't being open about everything
here though. Before we get to that we have to go through
what is probably the lowest moment in this game—maybe the lowest moment in the entire
series. Yes, it rivals Witcher One's Prologue and
Witcher Three's first ending for the top terrible section for me. Although the Prologue still probably takes
it. An integral part of writing is writing about
what you know. But all of us have extremely limited perspectives. It's said that it takes around 10,000 hours
to master a complex skill—like cooking or playing a musical instrument or painting or
learning Polish. Given even a generous budget of how you develop
your time on learning things, every writer is going to find themselves able to count
the amount of skills they've mastered on two hands. This is simply too limiting for “write what
you know” if you want a varied cast of characters over many stories. Not unless you're John Irving though, where
every main character is a writer AND a wrestler. There you go sick joke for all the John Irving
fans who also watch this channel. Naturally, research can help, especially interviews
with people who have mastered something that you want one of your characters to also use
at that high level in your story. Shadowing someone for a time as they work
can also be immensely enlightening. But this isn't always possible and, in many
cases, it's not even worth it. A character may need to have a background
mastery of a skill or a background life experience that you didn't have but it's not crucial
to the story in an active way. Here's where a great rule comes in: allude
to a skill instead of making yourself look like an idiot. This is also a fantastic technique when there's
simply no way to gain mastery in something if it's an imaginary skill like magic, or
something you shouldn't realistically be able to practice like serial killing or being a
president of a country—hopefully not both at the same time. Although audiences typically feel this reality
and are able to suspend their belief far more when it comes to explorations of skills like
these. But for cooking, or being an athlete, or something
like a doctor or a lawyer? Chances are high that someone who is enjoying
your story will be annoyed at how much you are getting wrong. So if your character is a world class chef
but you are not, then do not describe their cooking process in detail, unless you're willing
to put in those hundreds of hours of research. Do not try to “wing it” when it comes
to describing how a famous basketball player would think and act in a game. If your character is the best poet in the
world then do not try to write a poem in-character unless you are also the best poet in the world
right now. Conceal, don't feel. Allude, don't be rude. Be more vague than usual but don't bullshit. Own the limitation. A video game equivalent of this is when the
story hypes up a big event, like a starship armada arriving to blast through an alien
invasion, only for it to be one ship versus two other ships. That would be terrible right? Well this happens all the time with “great
armies clashing in the field” and it's just a handful of guys on either side. It's not even a small skirmish. It's more like a tavern brawl. There is some wiggle room in some scenarios. In some games I can easily imagine that a
lone unit, or a handful in a formation, actually represent a large squad or even an army of
about a thousand fighters. Just like some important cities in games are
much smaller than they should be, or that there aren't enough homes for the amount of
people that are walking around and they just disappear at night. I always love it when these numbers actually
do match and make sense, but I can easily and happily suspend my disbelief for some
instances of this and imagine they're representations of a larger reality. Sadly Witcher 2's big siege of Vergen asks
too much of me. One of the coolest moments in Iorveth's path
is when you get over the Henselt's side and see the ocean of tents and ships he has at
his disposal. Somehow having it across this water here makes
it appear bigger... like it's just a continuation of the river, and it's still so big even though
it's so far away. It becomes obvious that Vergen's ragtag group
doesn't stand a chance. And then he rolls in at the end with two hundred
or so soldiers, tops. This could have been fine with some clever
uses of perspective but then the fighting itself is so restricted. If you try to fight all the waves to hold
the line then Dethmold will show up and just kill you. The same Dethmold that teleports to one of
the most vulnerable positions in the city but none of Iorveth's elite archers manage
to try shooting his exposed Moldy head. Dethmold and Philippa awkwardly teleport around
throwing slow moving lightning bolts at each other like they're larping in the sky or doing
some sorcerer mating ritual, and I guess the poor state of Vergen's archers shouldn't be
looked at too harshly considering Kaedwen's ranged troops stay in the bottom streets shooting
at absolutely nothing. They stay in rows and shoot a wall. For the whole fight. The melee troops line up and take turns climbing
ladders that they placed in order to get at Vergen's forces manning the defensive high
ground. Why don't they just push down the ladders? Where are the rest of the fighters outside
the gates? Why do the waves wait for each group to be
killed by you before more of them start climbing the ladders? Surely when the enemy is overwhelmed and busy
fighting would be the best time to send more people up the ladders when you can't push
the ladders down. Henselt has the advantage of more people;
Vergen has the advantage of a fortified position. They should be using any opportunity they
can to overwhelm the opposition. And why oh why does the game go out of its
way to show a ladder having to be pulled up to keep part of the city safe while you perform
a sneak attack after this? After not allowing you to do it for so many
battles? It's like the game acknowledging it and that
it's in on the joke. But this isn't a funny scene. It's a very serious moment in the story. Why are these enemies immune to damage? Why does the fighting stop, including Kaedwen
just hitting pause, so Saskia can deliver a really bad speech before there's another
few rounds of fighting the same enemies on top of this same wall? Why does Zoltan say “there's no bloody gate
that Zoltan Chivay can't close!” like it's something to be proud of? Like it's part of his Dungeons and Dragons
character sheet. Right there, Zolton Chivay: is allowed to
close any gate. Why doesn't Dethmold blast open this gate after they close it? How is this the “checkmate tactic” that
wins the battle? Shutting a gate so the Kaedwenis within the
city are cut off from their greater numbers outside of it that can just batter the gate
down or use the same ladders that the Vergen forces will never push off the walls—you
know the ones they used the first time they attacked when a different barricade blocked
where this gate is? That has stairs at the top of it that just
lead down around the gate? If we're ignoring that and also accepting
that this gate was so impenetrable, why wasn't it closed to begin with? Why wasn't that the original plan? Why does Geralt break character harder than
any other moment in the series and start roleplaying a psychopath along with Zoltan, like he's
enjoying dumping hot oil all over the Kaedweni soldiers—the ones that are so alike to the
burning spirits he just inhabited, empathized with, and saved in the cursed mist? Note that I didn't have any list of problems like this for the Roche path. That's because you arrive at Vergen after
the main brunt of the battle has been fought and won. You don't see the full attack, only the wide
spread chaos in all of the streets. It's also your first time inside inner Vergen
and you don't know it all that well—and how many more people are fighting in the outer
part, too? Roche's path alludes to a great battle that
you only see bits and pieces of. Just like the Prologue section did with Foltest's
invasion, and the scenes of the previous battle here in the cursed mist realm. They were successful. Very successful—among the most successful
that I've seen of attempts like this in video games. This battle falls flat on its face and would
have been better—and require much less development time—if Geralt awoke from his coma long
after the battle had started so it was more like the Roche path. The problem with that change would be that
it skips an important scene with Saskia. Although that could be solved by simply making
her be the first person you find after leaving Philippa's house. During the siege she learns of a sneak attack
being led by Dethmold in the tunnels under the city. Which makes me wonder why Philippa doesn't
obliterate most of Henselt's army while Dethmold and his protection are gone but let's not
pick at the scab more than we have already because I'm pretty sure it's over an artery. This fight is just like the one on Roche's
path. To the point that it's in the same arena under
Vergen at around the same time during the battle. In that one Dethmold runs away after you beat
him. Here he activates godmode after you kill him
and destroys you in a cut scene. He's clearly been taking lessons from Letho
and every boss in Xenoblade Chronicles 2. Saskia has to save Geralt or else he would
have died. How does she do that? Well in case it wasn't obvious Saskia isn't
a Dragonslayer. She's a dragon. Dethmold makes this funny face and portals
out to presumably tell everyone what he's just seen. And this is all a pretty cheap way for Saskia
and Geralt becoming even for him saving her life since you won this fight but the game
just says yeah nah and takes your victory away from you. Saskia is the same dragon from the Prologue—Saesenthessis. It literally just took me 30 tries to say
that. She's also the daughter of a dragon that Geralt
meets in the books. The one Dandelion mentioned in Witcher 1. It's important to Saskia that Vergen wins
without her going dragon form. She wants to be an idol that people can firmly
believe in and rally around—which she doesn't think can happen for a dragon although for
obvious reasons I disagree. Vergen is ultimately victorious without Saskia's
dragon mode—well aside from her underground use of it when she had no choice. Henselt surrenders in the face of death. Saskia and Philippa then start negotiating
in an odd way and demand that Dethmold is executed for unnamed “war crimes”. Sile de Tansarville will become Henselt's
new advisor. This happens because of a final twist: Philippa
didn't actually need all of the ingredients you fetched for her. The rose of remembrance was used for another
spell that made Saskia pretty much fall in love with Philippa—to hang onto her every
word and make her believe that she's the most wonderful person on the planet. Which is why I think the cringy Lesbomancy
line serves well as misdirection so you don't question it as much as you might otherwise—this
dwarf seems to think this is normal (yeah just another day of seeing some Lesbomancy
nothing unusual here so), why shouldn't you? Philippa has enslaved a dragon under her will
and has had Dethmold killed so Sile—a sorceress from the Lodge that works with Philippa—can
fill that void and become a powerful influence in Kaedwen's court. This is also half of the reason why she was
in Flotsam: to collect ingredients from the Kayran that can cure infertility. Henselt, just like Henry the Eight again,
is having trouble siring an heir and this can help. Which elevates Sile's chances of gaining a
place of prominence in his court. I also don't believe for a second that Dethmold
didn't have a chance to tell anyone that Saskia is a dragon in the long time that has passed
since the tunnel fight and now. Nor do I believe that he wouldn't shout that
revelation out as he's led away to be executed, or furiously demand what “war crime” he
committed. Or to have a trial even. He also strangely brags about dying without
a fight, like he's so much better than Sabrina who cursed her enemies for a wrongful death? Like... what? It's weird. Vergen having a dragon on their side changes
too much for them to continue battling on as usual so he would have shared this information
and yet... that's exactly what happened for what seems to be hours of “in-game” time
after this tunnel fight. And yet Dethmold seems to be so surprised
that they lost. Iorveth is troubled by Saskia's actions which
leads to the chapter's end at the same place that Roche's route concludes: Philippa's house. The two women portal to Loc Muinne. Geralt discovers the truth about Philippa's
cure by reading one of her books that is conveniently still marked from when she was researching
it. And the two say farewell to Zoltan and Dandelion
before setting off for Loc Muinne themselves. Roche's path ends on a solemn “oh...”
sort of feeling, whereas Iorveth's ends with an “oh shit” as you realize what Philippa
has done. The last point I have here is that Geralt
says to Dandelion that the two of them have unfinished business. This is never brought up again. I have no idea what this means. It's one of many odd lines that I wonder about—were
these supposed to link to another chapter that was cut? Were they from an older version of the script
that was recorded but wasn't updated in time for release? Or was it a translation error or just a mistake? I have no idea. And that's that. Both sides of Chapter Two. I'm sorry to have to recap it so meticulously
but I'm guessing that some of you who haven't played this game might already be lost on
some of the details here and there. And even those of you who HAVE played it probably
only saw one or two sets of choices. Chapter Three dials up the complexity another
notch or four but thankfully—for the sake of this discussion and my own sanity—it's
much shorter than the other chapters in this game. We're not quite ready to move onto that though—for
many reasons that you may have picked up on as we went through these different narrative
lines in Chapter Two. There's too much wrong with this, right? Is Saskia still poisoned if Geralt is on the
Roche path? Stennis dies in the mist on this route, but
does his underling still go through with it even if his master dies. If Saskia is poisoned, how are the ingredients
for the cure collected without Geralt so quickly that she's conscious and well so quickly that
she can meet you under the tunnels in the Roche path? The evidence points strongly to her not being
poisoned at all. If that's the case then how does Philippa
have a chance to cast her mind altering spell on Saskia without her being vulnerable from
the poison? We'll soon see in Chapter Three that this
is something that happens regardless of your chosen path but... how? If she still does cast this spell how does
Philippa get a rose of remembrance to do so? Is Cynthia's betrayal still discovered, or
does Cynthia even exist at all if you're on the Roche path? If we're on the Iorveth route then for Henselt
we have a similar dumping of issues. Sabrina's curse had two layers and one of
them was directly on the King himself. Remember we break these separately—going
into the mist wouldn't have been enough or else we would have just done that. How does Henselt survive this without Geralt's
assistance? Does he still discover the conspiracy against
him without our investigation? If so, how? If not, how was he still able to attack Vergen? How did Henselt also survive the double witcher
assassination attempt on his life that Geralt stops on this route that happens independently
of whether Geralt is on this route? Was Dethmold here instead and somehow fought
off two witchers when he struggles with just one? I don't quite buy that possibility considering
that Dethmold was nowhere to be found during this fight and didn't stop Geralt from getting
into the tent either when trying to get royal blood. But Geralt sneaking in on this path would
have happened before the assassination attempt so wouldn't it have been a cool detail to
link these together and say that Henselt stepped up his security after Geralt got into his
tent like this? And that's why they were able to fight off
the witcher assassins? But, there's no line or justification for
that at all and I think that if the writers thought of that—that's such a compelling
idea and shows such great interplay between the different paths and possibilities that
there's no way that they wouldn't have put such a line in there if they had thought of
it... So, yeah I don't know. These problems snowball the more you think
about them. How does Henselt win the battle on the Roche
path? I think it's safe to assume that Saskia is
not poisoned so she's had many more days for war planning, boosting morale, further stability,
and even time for more recruitment. Not to mention secretly sneaking off to breathe
fire over some of Henselt's encampments. Stennis's death also makes little difference
because any of his supporters who left if he dies in the mist would also bail when he's
butchered in the street or thrown in prison. That's if they're able to leave at all with
the mist trapping them in. Saskia also showed that she's willing to go
dragon form if the situation became grave enough—to save Geralt. Who she barely gives a single shit about so
it's unthinkable to me that she wouldn't also go dragon mode to save the people of Vergen
once Henselt came close to victory. You hardly matter during the battle for Vergen
and the largest difference that you make at all—which is going with Saskia to stop the
secret assault in the underground—is something you still stop on the Roche path when you
both sneak into the city looking for Henselt. One of Phillipa's main goals here is to kill
Dethmold and have Sile replace him at Henselt's court. So they can seize power from within of one
of the largest and most powerful kingdoms in the Northern Realms. The independence of Vergen is a secondary
matter and, assuming she does get Saskia under her spell, I do not think Philippa wouldn't
use her enslaved dragon to make this happen even if that meant sacrificing her for it. Philippa says some things about Saskia in
Chapter Three that makes it clear she considers her to be sub-human. The only thing I can think of that could make
a difference here is the conspiracy. Maybe by unveiling it on the Roche path you
strengthen Henselt's standing with a large portion of his army that would have otherwise
gone rogue. But then Saskia still has the opportunity
on this path to go and weaken those forces by flying around as a big monster dragon. But hardly any of that army shows up regardless
and it's not even a question of overwhelming numbers on Saskia's side after all. It's clever tactics and preparation, within
the game's own nonsensically broken rules of course (chiefly involving ladders for some
reason), that wins the day. Ultimately it's impossible to know. Does the conspiracy even exist if you're on
the Iorveth path? Sabrina's curse foretells it so it should
still happen but we've already seen how the continuity from different decisions breaks. And that's the answer right there. That's the conclusion. The continuity is broken. Everything else we could possibly say about
it is a waste of breath: I just wanted to be thorough in demonstrating that Witcher
2 does not follow the rules of cause and effect. Every decision shifts all of the story around
to whatever the writers wanted to happen, like a deck of cards being shuffled and then
exchanged for an entirely different deck and then that being shuffled as well. It also needs to be said that much of this
could be a limitation of their budget. I think that's a real shame and one of the
most disappointing parts of the game because it aims so high. It considerably diminishes the effect of the
branching paths. It's still a captivating experiment of narrative
choices, but for me it's a failed one. However it would also be a failure for me
to focus only on these differences and problems. Even if there was only one path here—Roche
or Iorveth; Henselt or Saskia—then there'd be a lot to enjoy. Breaking a curse as complex as this is something
we haven't seen in the games yet and is a much larger part of the witcher's profession
than you would think if Witcher 1 was all the information you had to go on—even then
the biggest curse also linked to killing a monster and didn't have the same kind of tiered
progression of rules and rituals that we see here. Henselt's path in particular stands out so
distinctly from the rest of Witcher 1 and Flotsam. If this was the only path then Witcher 2 could
be separated into each of its three chapters being explorations of the main three facets
of the witcher world: monsters, curses, and politics. Which are not so coincidentally three of the
worst things in human imagination. Vergen on the other hand allows you to experience
a new kind of place in this world: one governed mostly by non-humans. It reminds me greatly of Markath from Skyrim,
and much of its design is also similar to Mahakam in Thronebreaker, showing a cool and
thoughtful level of consistency within CD Projekt's presentation. Philippa Owlheart is also a deep enough character
with an obvious agenda, and a storied history in the books, that I couldn't help but be
excited to see what would happen while interacting with her—and she's much more interesting
than Dethmold. Although I do have to temper that praise by
saying I didn't do Iorveth's path until after I had read the books and played Witcher 3. So my level of interest was enriched by wondering
how she ended up blindfolded to cover her missing eyes—and anticipating when that
would happen in the game. This sort of interaction was one of the most
compelling and unique experiences I had playing all the games and reading the books—how
the different states and stories of the characters interacted and fed into each other despite
the contexts being so divided. For book readers it's probably amazing to
see so many characters brought to life, animated and talking, in a game. Never mind one that has this high of a production
value and that goes double for Witcher 3. Whereas for me it was enthralling to read
the books and have so much of the lives of these characters be filled in and to finally
understand so many references and odd lines of dialogue. Philippa and Dijkstra were two of the best
for that. I'm hoping that these videos can do something
similar for people who only played Witcher 3 and have always wondered about the first
two games. There are fewer side quests in Chapter Two
if you look at each route on their own. Combined its about even with Chapter One and
most of them also loop back into providing new perspectives on main quest events and
the important characters within them. Even most of the mini-game stuff is incorporated
this way. Arm-wrestling dwarves and Adam Pangratt. The tournament that Henselt provides over
in which you duel Ves. And your final fistfighting opponent in Vergen
is both Stennis's herald and the younger brother of Seltkirk, a champion that died in the previous
war and someone you possess in the curse breaking ritual. Not every quest is equal of course—the one
where you find the drunk Odrin is possibly the worst one in the entire series. It's something you're going to want to do
too because three drunks in the Kaedweni camp won't stop shouting about finding him until
you complete it. Like they're trying to call back a lost dog. I hate this quest. I hate how it's purposefully designed to be
as annoying as possible with Odrin slumping over and needing to be roused with dialogue
before continuing. I hate how it can go nowhere if you say the
wrong thing in the tent after going through all of this horseshit. And I hate how CD Projekt thought it was such
a hilarious prank that they made it a meme for Witcher 3, based at least one of their
quests like this in that game, and have so many mentions of Odrin and his legendary “OMG
SO FUNNY” exploits spread throughout it. And I hate how it will probably show up in
Cyberpunk 2077 as well. I'm such a bundle of joy, I know. I also want to point out that none of these
side quests have difficult decisions. The succubus quest plainly has an additional
layer to it that you should keep pressing hard on. The friendly trolls you can find and save
are undeniably sentient and do not deserve to feel all the ends of your silver sword. And the conclusion of the Little Sisters quest
is similar to the succubus one—there's obviously something else going on here and you should
keep pushing to find it. It is an uncommon quest though, in that it
has a monster that will talk to you and try to reason with you but they still turn out
to be the monster. This curves back into the main story because
the victim here is a veteran of the previous invasion attempt who lived nearby, and his
family was destroyed by criminal soldiers. The only quests that clearly do not link back
to the core narrative are the standard monster contracts—although even these have a flavorful
reason behind them—and the bizarre feather collector who pays you for a large amount
of harpy feathers and then makes a chicken bird suit for himself. Apparently this was patched into the game
after release. A very important update. There are some final comments I'd like to make about the curse breaking scene but they're
wrapped tightly in a broader point that I make in Chapter Three. So let's move onto that. Finally. This Chapter Two section of the video was
by far the most difficult to write of anything I have ever done for the channel and I can't
tell if I did the game justice or if I managed to avoid boring you or if I was bogged down
in too many details. Time and the comments below will tell will
tell. I'm just relieved we're past it and I enjoyed
the challenge of my attempt. But maybe not the twenty or so rewrites that
this went through. So let's maybe go save Triss and move onto
the final section we have before we get to Witcher 3. Loc Muinne is the setting for the next and
final area of Witcher 2. The end coming so soon should be a surprise
when you play yourself but obviously this video prevents that from happening. Witcher 2 is much shorter than the other two
games in this trilogy and is also brief compared to most other fantasy RPGs. It has about the same amount of content as
Witcher 1 if you see both routes and make different choices but that's a whole other
issue. I do want to state directly that a shorter
playtime is not a flaw in of itself—I just don't think it's a good fit nor intentional
for reasons we'll soon get into. At release the game's length was shorter. The Enhanced Edition added some of the bridging
cinematics that we've seen throughout this video plus extra quest content—the lion's
share of which is in the form of two large side quests in this chapter, one exclusive
to each of the main paths you're continuing to follow. As you stand here about to climb down to Loc
Muinne you will be either accompanied by Roche or Iorveth. The differences start immediately: with Iorveth
explaining that Loc Muinne was once inhabited by another sentient race called the Vrans
which were a race of lizard people that probably controlled this planet before the elves showed
up—and that they tragically died out and that the humans slaughtered the elves that
peacefully claimed the city after that happened. While Roche will tell you that the elves butchered
the Vrans and then took the city for themselves just like the humans did later to the elves. There was no disease or climate change that
killed them. The bodies of the Vrans bore the marks of
conquest. Considering the history of the elves and the
terrible things they have done I believe Roche here, especially since he also doesn't deny
the same brutal streak found in humans. But whether Iorveth is a liar or has been
lied to isn't clear. Chapter Three is a divide in the story that
comes after the divide you caused in Flotsam. But one of these choices is available for
both paths—as you can see simplified on the screen right now. No matter what you've done on the way to get
here, you can always choose the middle option which is to save Triss. Whereas with Roche you have the option to
save Foltest's bastard daughter: the abducted Anais. With Iorveth you have the option to pursue
Philippa. Most of the rest of the chapter also has the
same foundation. You are always in the same section of Loc
Muinne with each of the major Kingdoms having erected separate encampments in districts
that they've claimed. Some of these soldiers may be hostile to you
depending on your path but the fundamental structure of the chapter is unchanged. You arrive, complete any side quests that
catch your fancy although there's only a handful of them, decide whether to help Triss or your
chosen partner that you arrived with, then proceed to the final confrontation. The rulers of the Kingdoms have gathered,
along with many of the active magic users in these lands, to form a new conclave between
them. So let's ignore all that and instead enjoy
The Janksgiving Day Parade. Because it starts here in Loc Muinne, with
an old friend kicking off the celebration! Forgetting all the combat strangeness we went through earlier, we have: Clipping on Geralt's hair. Geralt's boots. The floorboards. Clothes. Everywhere. NPC eye color changes to blue at a distance. Things aren't aligned right for certain angles
and no setting change I've ever tried has fixed this. It's looked this way on four different computers
that I've ran this on. Aiming this ballista usually won't work because
the game stops reading your mouse input and doesn't tell you that. You have to aim with keyboard keys instead. The game also stops reading your mouse in
dialogue choices. A few times the mouse cursor would also disappear
but I could still select things with an invisible pointer—strangely though, it still showed
up in my recording and I really don't understand that. Dice fly off the table whenever you try to
roll them because it has this weird physics system. The only way to play is to drop them straight
down like your trousers before a romance card. And the dice set somehow looks worse than
it did in Witcher 1! Sudden music changes. Ghost melted faces in cut scenes. The giant insects outside of Flotsam can charge
themselves into dust if they miss you. Sometimes people vanish into the void! Sometimes Geralt pops OUT of the void. NPCs walking in circles. NPCs stuck walking in circles! And into walls. Escorted NPCs can get stuck on other NPCs
and need to be rammed by you to continue walking to the quest trigger. But even when this works, you have to stop
and wait for them to finish talking or else you'll arrive and cut off the conversation
early and never hear what they had to say. Sleeping NPCs will talk to you like they're
awake and bolt upright. Whereas talking to others can teleport you
into places you can't escape from. Like behind a bar. Or in a campfire. A campfire that damages you. The maps are wrong. The maps are wrong. There's no path here. The maps are wrong. Inside areas have corridors out of sync with
where they actually are. There's no door here in this underground tunnel
network. There's a trapdoor in the ceiling way to the
left but there's nothing over here at all. Yes sometimes maps are inaccurate to add to
the realness of the world but these maps are made by Geralt as you explore—and door icons
like these shouldn't be able to show up in error. The mini-map can also go blank, and red enemy
indicators often show up when there's no enemy actually there. Dozens of spelling mistakes, incorrect subtitles,
and at least two instances of lines of dialogue straight up being skipped because there was
no voice acting tied to it and these weren't side areas either. This is main quest stuff. Damage over Time effects like bleeds don't show in the combat log! The left mouse button icon and the right mouse
button icon can switch places in the bottom of the screen! The loud ambient hissing battle sounds of
the curse mist can become permanent after you're done. They even follow you to the main menu screen. You have to turn the game off and restart
to get rid of them. The arm wrestling icon moves like it's running at 5 frames per second. The little medallion icon thing chugs harder
than Thomas the Tank Engine on spring break. Containers can light up to show that you can
loot them but you actually can't. They're mislabeled. When in stealth mode, enemies can lose the
ability to perceive you. So you can run around in front of them knocking
them all out as much as you like with no worries. Sometimes this can happen even after combat
has started and they revert to being passive. You can wipe out whole groups like this. You can aard down this suspicious looking
wall at the elven bath fountain before coming here with Triss. But the game won't let you in, and Roche will
pretend the wall is still there when he shows up later. So he may have been watching this <sex clip>. The whole time. Geralt can say “I have no idea where to find ostmurk” when you already found it
and have some in your inventory. There's multiple odd lighting changes and
flashes. And Roche's weird face morph change. This guy's name is Dethmold. I know I said it already but I'm saying it
again because it's part of the jank. MOLDY DEATH. Guards can't walk through open doorways. Henselt's head wound phases in and out of
existence. The bandages come off and go back on like
he's a mummified stripper. Your attack buttons can stop working if there's
something else you can interact with nearby, like a corpse you can burn. Don't fight enemies near these if you want
to be able to hit them. This was very confusing until I realized what
was going on. Every time you load in in Chapter Two the
screen shakes like a cannon is fired to welcome you back. Your adrenaline fueled enemy finisher move
doesn't always play. Sometimes you use it and the enemy immediately
dies with no animation like they were killed with a console command. Or nothing happens at all and your adrenaline
is still used up. Or the enemy is killed but also duplicated
by the execution! Saying “Calm down you silly cow” to a
troll is labeled as the POLITE option. Some quest items have weight and you can't
store them because they're quest items. So they take up your inventory weight limit
until you hand them in—sometimes much later. Even a whole chapter later. I think even if you can't do the quest anymore
they're still stuck in your inventory taking up space. Geralt's delivery is too fast in these graphic
novel scenes. It sounds to me that they recorded each line
as a separate file and they're played without any gaps or recorded silence to provide pauses
between some sentences. And if you've watched my old videos you know
I'm a god damn expert at messing that up. Enemies spawning in the ceiling. You can die in conversations if attack effects
become disjointed enough. You still get to pick dialogue too even if
you're dead! Healthbars can appear floating in the distance
during fist fights. Healthbars can also vanish during normal combat. You can kill some guards in front of other
guards and they won't notice or care. And then they just grow back. When you're Stennis at the beginning of Chapter
Two NPCs have lines that address you as if you're still Geralt. One time Iorveth spoke a dialogue line I chose
instead of Geralt. I don't want to be an elf. There's no way to see if you've already read
a book in your inventory. If you let Adam Pangratt live he gives you
his sword as a thank you. If you kill him you can't loot the sword yourself. Laying down harpy traps that they take back
to their nests to explode fails to work more than it succeeds. Usually there's no visual of the harpy carrying
the explosive at all. The nest just magically explodes a few moments
later with no bomb ever taken to it. Paths on either side of the mist in Chapter
Two are inexplicably caved in depending on your chosen route, to keep you from exploring
too much. Sometimes the cave-ins happen immediately
after you make a choice while visiting the other side, so you can't explore another path
after choosing the first one. Random load screens! You're walking around and boom load screen
effect out of nowhere for a second. And lastly, a dwarf once Bad Manners'd me
at dice. He knew he had won with four 6's so he chucked
the last die off the table. This isn't jank I just think it's funny and
want it to be in the video. And that's it. Add all this to the combat analysis, the secret
perk menu, the skill tree lying to you, and all of the other little problems with choices
and dialogue. I hope you now understand why I described
Witcher 2 as being burnt at the beginning of this video. We have a few things to get through before
we see this dragon fight again though. For the sake of simplicity let's pretend that
all of the choices in this chapter are available to us, independent of what we've done in the
game so far. Rochveth will make it clear that Geralt doesn't
have time to do both major tasks—although they are also both understanding about Geralt
needing to personally save Triss, Roche especially. This requires you to take Shilard hostage,
which gets him quickly and unceremoniously killed. Following this is one of strangest sequences
for Geralt's power level fluctuating all over the place during the games. He wipes out an entire platoon of Nilfgaard
soldiers. Solo. At one point they take turns jumping down
to fight him instead of just shooting him. Then after this you save a very grateful Triss. Depending on your choices, her being brought
back to normal size may have also been your introductory cinematic to this area—with
Shilard forcing another sorceress to do so and then killing her. This is another book character and one of
the founding members of the Lodge of Sorceresses. Discarded. The other possible opening scene is with Dethmold. Whether Henselt lives or dies, Anais has been
kidnapped and is the prisoner of Kaedwen. If you want to kill Dethmold on the Roche
path then this is the only way to make that happen. First you meet with King Radovid of Redania
and you can admit to killing Henselt if that's the choice you made. He offers to help you and Temeria regain sovereignty,
but he says he can only do so if Anais is brought to him for protection until she's
old enough to take the throne. So you find yourself dealing with the death
of one King, earning the killing blow or the wrath of another, and then coming to a third
for help. Radovid is very different in Witcher 2 than
he was in Witcher 1 but hold that thought for now. If you decide to pursue this with Roche, then
Geralt once again cuts his way through dozens of men in Kaedwen's army not Nilfgaard's,
including a mage who isn't Dethmold. When you finally do find him it's in a really
awkward scene with him pampering himself in an invisible mirror while his NPC placeholder
lover is strewn on the bed. I don't know if this is worth saying but I
never got the impression that Dethmold was vain before now especially since he doesn't
use any magic to improve his appearance like most mages do. The reveal that he's gay or bi, when combined
with this new found vanity and Roche storming in to literally slice his balls off for revenge
makes me really uneasy. In a bad way, not an on-purpose-for-the-story
way like when other characters do horrible things in this series. I don't know if this is done in poor taste
or not but I can say for sure that it feels off to me and is the only time in all three
games that I felt that way. But it's not worth dwelling over so let's
move on. Anais is saved after this but there's a final
obstacle. Remember the Knights of the Order of the Flaming
Rose? They're back, acting as a peace keeping force
on behalf of Radovid of all people. The King apparently doesn't trust you to bring
him the girl willingly (a really good sign) and so the knights have come to make sure
it happens. If you refuse to hand her over then you'll
have show them the Butcher of Blaviken side of Geralt too by making some Flaming Rose
bacon. The choice with Roche is at the end. Whereas the choice with Iorveth is at the
beginning: either get yourself arrested so you're conveniently thrown into a prison cell
next to Philippa. Or break into the sewers and get there on
your own. Either way Radovid is once again center stage
and this is a scene you won't fully understand without book knowledge. After what we've seen Philippa do in just
this game it's not difficult to imagine that she deserves some rage and punishment from
Radovid—a prince that she helped raise. But having both of her eyes gouged out is
more hardcore than my browser bookmarks. I do love one part of this though, how Radovid
says that he was always unable to stand constantly being under her scrutiny and the constant
watch of her eyes, and that one of the lessons she taught him was to always maintain eye
contact and never look away or show weakness—then he doesn't flinch or look away as her eyes
are scooped out like eyes cream. And do you see what I mean with the brutality
in this game? This is just as brutal as what happens to
Dethmold but it feels better set up and appropriately... inappropriate? If that makes sense. I think there's an intangible quality that
sets these two scenes apart that I hope you intuitively understand and it's not just me
that senses it. Or maybe I'm just failing at explaining it. Or seeing something that isn't there. If you got here by being captured then Radovid
does not free you, even if he owes you one for saving Adda in Witcher 1. Shilard comes along instead to kill you and
here is where the rule breaking igni witcher sign happens, with your hands bound but you
can still sign it up. I died here twice before I even noticed the
prompt and I hope it's as hard to see for most of you watching too, or else I am more
of a boomer than I realize. If you weren't captured then you attack instead. Either way you have a choice to take Shilard
as your prisoner and save Triss. Or recommit to taking Philippa to Iorveth
and then Philippa's house, where you can find a magical dagger that's meant to break the
spell on Saskia if it's stabbed into her heart. Then Philippa escapes because of course she
does. So there are the three outcomes. After this you can do some more side quests
or head to the ending ceremony. I dislike this because it feels like a false
choice—if you have time to do other things why can you not also assault the Nilfgaardian
base for Triss after saving Philippa or Anais? The side quests they added here in the Enhanced
Edition also both take longer to complete than either of the main quest paths: leaving
to a whole other forested area that takes quite a while to get to from what I understand
to find out more about the assassination attempts on Foltest's bastards, or diving into the
sewers with the return of synthetic lover Cynthia to acquire a magical artifact that
allows you to spy on some major characters in the story. These added quests are decent and are very well integrated into the main quest but that's
also a problem—right? If time is so precious then why are you wasting
so much of it by doing these errands? I think the Cynthia quest is far more entertaining
and worthwhile of these two. It has some beautiful artwork to see and also
makes Loc Muinne feel much larger. It builds on it vertically too since you end
up going quite high up in the main quest, so here you go deep down. You also have the opportunity for some revenge
here against the Nilfgaardians and Cynthia if you like, or you can view Cynthia as a
pawn on the board just like everyone else, not hold it against her, and naturally sleep
with her. This is one of the few things in the games
that I never did myself. Instead I reloaded the save to see all of
the memory spying scenes which are just like the dreams in the harpy cave. The most important one here is seeing Saskia
and Sile together, plotting their next move while Philippa is gone. The new quest on Roche's side isn't as good. Although it is tragically funny seeing as
the big revelation is that two separate noble houses in Temeria both tried to kill Anais
and Boussy at the same time. Due to this only Boussy was killed and Anais
is left, because the overlapping, uncoordinated attempts interfered with each other. Aside from it being a bit boring, the issue
I have is with how you prove it. There's this complicated paper testing process
involving ingredients and water and bat shit and applying heat that you have to learn by
overhearing a sleeping alchemist nearby who is conveniently reciting it all in his dreams. Which having said it all out loud just now
makes me wonder if the bat shit bit is it owning up to the fact that it's a big joke. But.. anyway, whether you do it right—and
what color the paper turns into—reveals whether the letter you've found is a forgery
or not and so someone is implicated. I'm willing to admit that maybe I'm too stupid
to understand what's going on here or I missed a line of dialogue that justifies it but the
whole time I was wondering—surely this doesn't prove a single thing because the paper could
have just been stolen? Or intentionally replaced? Or different paper could be used so the “no,
look, it's a forgery!” excuse could be used as a way to wash away guilt if the traitor
was discovered, on purpose? Foltest is dead and its his own highest nobility
and court that are the ones scheming and many of them should know about this system—so
I fail to see how this proves anything definitely. Similarly there's another quest involving
scrubbing magical runes off areas to unlock magically protected chests. I solved these but I still don't think I really
understand them. You read clues about what each symbol can
stand for, then feel out the order from another book near the runes, and I was able to half-translate
what the runes meant by matching their shapes to the clues in thise book. I was able to solve this on my own and really
did feel like I was making connections and logically working through it but I was still
a little surprised each time that my process was successful. In the interest of not further bogging down
an already overly long video I am going to skip the pointless discussion about these. The riddles and puzzles in Cynthia's quest
were much better in my opinion. Because I felt like there was something more
tangible there to dig into and work through logically. The other side quests are more about Loc Muinne
itself than the gathering that's happening here. There are some opportunities to improve your
gear for the final showdown and there's the secret boss hiding in the sewers called The
Operator. You need to have found a book in Chapter Two
to complete this quest and this is one of the worst parts of the game unfortunately. There's a “button turns a bunch of fires
on and off” puzzle that's made annoying because you can't see all the fires at once
because of the game's camera angle. And then the boss fight is a mage that summons
gargoyles in a small battle arena. Very quickly here are the problems: the gargoyle
hit cones are much larger than their attacks. The mages fireballs have the same issue and
only sometimes are blocked by the gargoyles themselves. The mage can activate his blocking shield
long before the visual shows up because it's tied to his health, not a spell that he casts. The gargoyles can block your attacks at any
time and stun you into a death. You can't always dodge every attack because
they overlap with each other in a small fighting arena, and that's made much worse because
there are invisible chunks of the wall that stick out farther than the visual that can
stop your dodge rolls. Alternatively you can choose to impersonate
the “chosen one” for this quest when you speak to the Operator. This allows you to reallocate all of your
skill points. Also there's the final arm wrestling quest
here in which Geralt can discover that his opponent is cheating his way to victory. There's a performance enhancing drug that
you can use yourself to beat the cheater, or you can still win without it if you're
good enough. Considering that Geralt is permanently-enhanced
by drugs I find his righteous indignation a bit hollow. That said, everyone who challenges him already
knows he's a witcher so they know what they're getting in for so maybe it's okay. That's the side quests mopped up and I want
to take this opportunity to say for the last time that most of them in these first two
games are expertly interlinked with the main story. Witcher 1 and 2 have their ups and downs but
I think how well they manage to incorporate optional tasks into the central narrative
is the most consistently great thing about them. It is stellar work that's worthy of study
and imitation. And CD Projekt should be proud. There's one last thing we have to speak about
before we get to the finale and the tangled headphone cord that is all the possible endings. You may have noticed that throughout all of
these hours discussing Witcher 2 that I've rarely brought back any of the events from
Witcher 1. There's a reason for that. The game barely does it either. However the biggest exception is right here
in Loc Muinne. Guess who's back? Siegfried's back. Tell a friend. Helping the Order in Witcher 1 has the largest
impact in Witcher 2: they're here in Loc Muinne no matter what but if you helped Siegfried
in your imported save then he's the new Grand Master of the Order of the Flaming Rose. And he's here! He's here! I went Order on my third playthrough of Witcher
1 and because of learning about Siegfried's presence at the end I had to reload a save
all the way back in Flotsam to play the other path too on that imported game—the appetite
of the Nightmare Analysis Creature knows no bounds. Initially I thought this would only matter
on the Iorveth path. You're both fugitives when you show up here
so the Order of the Flaming Rose is hostile to you. It shines a spotlight on a difficult question
that I've hinted at a few times—what on earth was Geralt's end game here when siding
with the Scoia'tael? He's a much more wanted man now than when
he was known only as a Kingslayer. Anyway, without Siegfried you can try to fight
your way into the city and become frustrated when you learn all of the enemies here respawn
endlessly, even the named NPCs. There are infinite Derricks and Nigels and
who knows what else. It's a bit shit. Instead you have to sneak through the nearby
caves with Iorveth. But! Siegfried will let you pass if you approach
them if you're in an Order route imported save. He even has a ton of really informative dialogue
about what's going on in the city that elucidates the situation better than any other NPC. It's a great introduction to this chapter. The only thing I'm sad about is that they
replaced his voice actor. He still looks like that guy from Doctor Who
but gone is the pompous but still charming knight. Although you could view this as the weight
of leadership stripping him of his chivalrous facade. Surprisingly, however, the Roche path also
benefits from an Order import. You get the same warm welcome at the city
entrance but also help when you rescue Anais. You can convince Roche to either take the
girl to protect personally, working with the emerging temporary leader of Temeria named
John Natalis, or hand her over to Radovid. As we saw earlier the Order shows up to take
her from you but Siegfried allows for a peaceful solution if Roche is going to take Anais for
himself. He'll look the other way as you leave with
her. Which is exactly the sort of minor but still
fulfilling differences I would have liked to see more often. Triss or Shani? No difference outside of a journal entry that
was apparently added in the Enhanced Edition. Thaler lives or dies? A small nod to it in Flotsam which I enjoyed. Staying Neutral? No difference that I saw. The surrender of Jacques's soul? Fighting the King of the Wild Hunt? These seem to be retconned into Geralt always
fighting. Any of your actions in the Outskirts, Lakeside,
or Vizima? Absolutely nothing but that's to be expected. It's the Scoia'tael and Adda choices and their
lack of repercussions that are the most upsetting. If you go with Yaevinn in Witcher 1 then the
Scoia'tael achieve a great victory. Vizima and, by extension, all of Temeria become
more tolerant of non-humans. I am not so naive to think that it was an
overnight improvement but many of the official laws—like the oft bemoaned “double poll
tax”—would have been eased. If this wasn't the case there needed to be
a few lines addressing it. Foltest promised Yaevinn that things would
get better in exchange for them withdrawing from the city—then he turned out to be a
liar so that's why the Scoia'tael hate him. Without these lines, Iorveth and his people
just helped Letho murder the ruler that was the most sympathetic to their cause and the
most devoted to making things actively better for them. Undoing the sacrifice of Yaevinn's unit and
the thousands of non-humans that died in the fight in Vizima. It still makes sense for Letho to go through
with it, since he's secretly working for Nilfgaard not the Scoia'tael, but Iorveth should reject
this plan for the sake of progress in Temeria. And suggest hitting another king instead. It goes further than that though: Zoltan never
brings it up either, even when it's REALLY DAMN relevant because they have arrows pointed
at his chest. Neither does Triss or Roche. Upon your first meeting with Iorveth there's
no option to say “Hey I helped Yaevinn SO MUCH just one month before this. My reputation precedes me so drop down and
talk to me like a friend god damn it.” Instead there's only a taunt about how the
Scoia'tael were used by Nilfgaard in the previous war and so many of them were killed because
of it—and how they're still being used again today, just maybe not by Nilfgaard again. Turns out, ironically, Geralt was unknowingly
right on the money. Through Letho's manipulation the Scoia'tael
are once again a tool of Nilfgaard. A detail that I truly love because it's so
insidious and well thought out with this dialogue here and it's something you will smile at
on your second time through. In fact the only time your Scoia'tael choice ever comes up is in Vergen on the Iorveth
path. You can speak to the big elf himself about
Yaevinn and your past work. If you went Order then you lie about staying
Neutral. If you went Scoia'tael then Iorveth hand-waves
it away as unimportant and doesn't mention any of the progress made due to your actions. Meanwhile the most success that his unit has
had recently is making the people of this small town really really scared. He doesn't even successfully take it over. Compare that to Yaevinn's accomplishments
and Iorveth is saying it doesn't matter. Then, doubling down on the nonsense, you can
push and bring up Dol Blathanna. The Valley of Flowers. At the end of the previous war, as a part
of the treaty between the North and Nilfgaard, the leaders of the Scoia'tael commandos were
sold out by the elfish leader Francesca Findabair and executed. And this is something that's even said in
this game in one of the flashbacks. Iorveth, who is briefly mentioned in the books,
apparently barely escaped this fate. In return, for the first time in a long time,
the elves were given their own land—which is both a reward for helping Nilfgaard during
their invasions and also a part of the peace treaty. They get their own Kingdom and/or Duchy. It's a bit confusing. It's called Dol Blathanna. The Valley of Flowers. All of these downtrodden oppressed elves fighting
for their own freedom already have the option: go to the Valley of Flowers. It undermines the whole idea of the Scoia'tael
still existing. Again I am not so naive to think that this
would be a solution for every single elf—just like the small dwarven kingdom isn't a solution
for every dwarf. In fact some of them really like to leave
there and go to the human lands instead—but having their dwindling terrorist numbers already
cut down so hard during and after the war, on top of the lure of having their own new
land to rebuild, makes the empowered existence of the Scoia'tael in the games mightily questionable. If Yaevinn was unusual in his strength, which
is how it appeared to me in the first game, then that'd be one thing. But apparently there are so many different
commando units still out there that they're willing to fight each other and squander the
victories of the others. Unfortunately Iorveth's justification for
rejecting Dol Blathanna also makes little sense. He points out the low birthrate of the elves
who live there as a sign of decay. Never mind that keeping all of the young elves
riled up and fighting is going to directly cause that problem, it's also an issue that
has existed for at least a thousand years. Maybe even two thousand. In one of the stranger twist details in the
books, elves were becoming less and less fertile before humans showed up. For some reason elven women have a much easier
time conceiving with human mates. That's one of the reasons why humans were
able to get a strong start in a new and hostile world to begin with. Iorveth knows this. This reality isn't a damning problem for Dol
Blathanna or even the fault of Francesca. But he says it anyway. Does this matter though? To most of you—probably not. To me? Kind of. I think the games do a mostly good job with
being faithful to the source material. Witcher 2 is an excellent continuation of
the most complicated part of that story and this is its biggest stumble: the Scoia'tael
probably shouldn't exist anymore. Which is kind of how it is in Witcher 3. However I have to be fair and point out that maybe Iorveth is lying—to himself and his
people as well as Geralt. This could be Scoia'tael propaganda. Maybe their numbers are fewer than they appear. Maybe he acknowledges the work Yaevinn did
and just wants to see the world burn. But given his adoration of Saskia and how
much he hoped to see a second non-human sanctuary be born in the Pontar Valley—a sister Valley
to the one of Flowers—I have trouble accepting that. I have trouble accepting he would risk so
much with Letho's plan and dicking around in Flotsam when Saskia needs him. Especially when it seems like he's in love
with her. Ultimately though I'm just disappointed that
the Order route received it's extra acknowledgment and ways to use your past actions to cause
change, while the Scoia'tael line has to be ignored in totality. Not to mention the neutral path. If the Order import differences deserve praise—which
I strongly think that they do—then this deserves criticism. Adda's fate might be more troublesome to most
of you. This might be something that actually you
care about after all that Scoia'tael bullshit. Poor Adda. Either killed and discarded—or saved and
discarded, like a Strike Card in Slay the Spire. King Radovid could be married to Adda at this
point in the game. In case you've forgotten or skipped the Witcher
1 section, Adda is another bastard child of Foltest's, only that time it was from an incestuous
relationship with his sister. Whose name was also Adda. This makes the matter of succession for the
crown of Temeria quite awkward, and not for the usual reasons that incest causes. Radovid wants Temeria for himself. So does Henselt. So does everyone. All rulers want more territory, more people
to tax, more resources, and more power. Anais is a valuable chip to have in a monarch's
pile because she can unite Temeria with the power of her bloodline, bastard princess or
not. But then why can't Adda do the same? Because she might be dead if you killed her
in Witcher 1. And so it's too much work to factor that possibility
in a meaningful way and so she's made irrelevant in a patronizing dismissal. Rulers are going to pick and choose when they
will follow the laws. If there's enough to be gained by ignoring
tradition then welcome to the new age. The problem with Adda is that it's inconsistent
and also deeply effected by other decisions you make. Radovid does actually try to claim Temeria
through Adda in Chapter Two. Henselt rejects this with a scoff and that's
the end of it. But Henselt only represents Kaedwen. What if Stennis wants to support Redania against
their common enemy? What about Queen Meve? Or Nilfgaard? Or John Natalis, who has risen to temporarily
lead Temeria in this time of turmoil. Surely he would want Adda instead of allowing
the country to fracture into conflict? Adda was royal enough to be chosen by traitors
in Witcher 1 to overthrow Foltest. She was royal enough to be creating fake royal
edicts and to be considered a worthy queen to Radovid as part of the treaty between Temeria
and Redania—negotiations that took place while Vizima was burning and, judging by Foltest's
haste and desperation and how he pointed out Radovid would end up ruling a huge chunk of
Temeria through the deal, it appears certain that Redania and Radovid struck a big win
with this marriage. So if Adda can be passed over because she's
a bastard, why can't Anais be treated the same way? She's a child and still so important that
Henselt has her as his captive unless you and Roche free her. Adda is a fucking queen. If you hand Anais over to Radovid then Henselt
states that he's so screwed over by the subterfuge that he's impressed by it, even as he takes
the L. Give Anais to John Natalis and both Radovid and Henselt—the only two surviving
monarchs in this meeting that want to vulterize Temeria—shrug and sort of accept it. Why not contest it like Henselt did with Adda? The level of hypocrisy here can reach the
ludicrous level of Radovid stating Anais isn't that important because she's just Foltest's
bastard while he's god damn married to another one of Foltest's bastards and is using that
to claim territory. This keeps getting messier and messier. Henselt could be dead right now. His body can be seen next to Dethmold's chambers
if Roche killed him. So if he's the only ruler that rejected Adda's
legitimacy, why is Anais still important? She could be considered dead too if you don't
save her. And the answer to all of these is once again:
it's simply too difficult to account for every choice the player can make. Especially those that were included in a previous
game that could sharply limit the plot possibilities of a sequel. We're going to see more of this in Witcher
3 unfortunately and I have to sadly conclude that video games aren't ready for this level
of branching of paths yet. I really enjoy the choices within each game
but I think that if a developer decides the work for proper continuity of each one isn't
worth it—or that it's not fiscally feasible—then one set of choices from the previous game
should be chosen as canon and that's the end of it. Maybe they could read the stats of everyone
that plays the game on their first playthrough and go with those choices as the canon ones. I think that would be kinda interesting actually,
but eh it could be exploited. Never mind. I'd much prefer a Canon Continuity to deeply
imperfect concessions like important characters being put in Schrodinger's Continuity and
being alive but still dead. Or, as we'll see with Henselt shortly, being
spared by you and then killed off between games in a way that feels worse than a choice
being chosen as canon. It's like the games are telling you no, you
made the wrong decision here so let us do it for you between sequels in a contrived
way. And your choices don't matter because everything
ended up in the same place anyway. Those decisions come to a head here at this
meeting. An incomplete summary would be:
1) Did you go Roche or Iorveth? This will determine whether Henselt won the
battle of Vergen or not. Whether Dethmold is alive or not. And whether Saskia is present in this meeting
or not. 2) Is Henselt alive or dead? Did you save Anais and if so, did you give
her over to Redania or did Roche keep her under Temeria's protection? Keep in mind that Henselt being dead or not
is a variable that multiplies the possibilities of these decisions. 3) Did you go with Iorveth to rescue Philippa? Then you can break the spell on Saskia after
the final dragon fight. If not you can leave her impaled and enchanted
but otherwise alive, or put her out of her misery. 4) Did you save Triss instead of either choice
with Roche or Iorveth? If so then she will prevent a massacre. If you don't save her then Letho is brought
to the conclave as Shilard's fake prisoner and ace up his sleeve, to trigger mass hysteria
and the systematic slaughter of nearly every mage in Loc Muinne. The streets are full of dead bodies and pyres
stacked deep in the final section if this happens. If Triss is rescued then Nilfgaard will be
too scattered by Geralt's own mini-butchering to cause this panic, plus Shilard will be
dead so he can't testify with Letho. Instead Triss will implicate only Sile for
the assassinations of Kings. The formal agreement between the rulers and
mages will go through and a renewed society of magic users will be casting spells to seal
the city in the final section. Instead of all the blood running through the
streets. These are only the consequences shown in this
scene too. In the city you can meet Aryan La Valette
if you let him live in the Prologue. But doesn't he die in this fire if you let
him out of prison? Well apparently he knows all the secret passages
of the castle. Which makes me wonder why he still felt the
need to set his own home on fire before he took one of them, and why Geralt wasn't included
in that plan after graciously rescuing him from the executioner. What about Stennis? Did you let him live? Then you learn more about him here. How he became a great and just ruler of his
people as the new King of Aedirn, who only improved the lives for everyone in the many
years of his rule. Which I have to question because no matter
what Nilfgaard invades Aedirn and in a few months conquers it. And I don't think independence is ever restored
for them no matter what happens at the end of Witcher 3. But maybe I'm misunderstanding something or
they become a vassal and Stennis is allowed to continue ruling. See there are a few problems. Henselt also knows that Sile is a traitor
and working with the assassins—the same ones that were sent to kill him. So why isn't he capable of nullifying this
meeting? Triss isn't necessary. Then there's the bigger issue of Saskia. Philippa has instructed her to listen to Sile
but if you went with Roche you're left wondering how Saskia was mind-controlled without the
poison. That's being generous however because if you
went with Roche and it was also your first playthrough you'll be wondering who the hell
Philippa Eilhart even is and why is this dragon suddenly back and working with Sile for some
reason? You won't know it's Saskia. You won't know how she got here. You won't know anything. You're left completely in the dark. Having expelled those gripes, I do want to
say that I'm impressed by how many different outcomes there are here and that most of them
do make sense if you have full context. I think there must be close to twenty different
versions of this scene depending on everything you've done before now, and the choices and
differences continue in the scene after this too. The confrontation you have with Sile also
has one of my favorite bits of writing in the entire series, when she comments on how
Letho fooled them all with that sluggish demeanor and stupid looking face of his. Because it matches so perfectly to how he
looks! Letho himself says he does it on purpose later
on. And I'd guess most players will also think
that about him when they first see him. It's great. What isn't great is the dragon boss fight,
although there are worse visuals in the game. The battle properly starts after you decide
to save Sile or let her be torn apart in a megascope malfunction—from sabotage caused
by Letho. If you save her then she gives you a breadcrumb
about Yennefer—that she's apparently alive and well in Nilfgaard and therefore must have
a really good and really compelling reason for not trying to search for Geralt. Right? Sile then returns for a brief and brutal cameo in Witcher 3. Let her die and that's the end of Sile de
Tansarville. The best part of the dragon fight is the beautiful
view of the city and the surrounding mountain. Like the Prologue castle town a ton of work
went into the backdrop of this area and I'm sad to say I ignored most of it my first time
through. There's a wonderful sense of scale here and
throughout most of the game and I wish I could explore it more freely. You end up quite far from Loc Muinne after
the dragon fight is over since Geralt does some insane acrobatics while being carried
by the dragon into a nearby forest. This is the first time in the games that I
think Geralt surpasses his combat abilities from the books and it seems strange to me
that Saskia the Dragonslayer was such a big deal and yet Geralt the Dragonslayer doesn't
become a thing after this if you choose that ending. Probably because this is one of three outcomes
of this fight and once again it was too much trouble to account for them all. But if you have the dagger from Philippa then
you don't get a choice. Geralt automatically uses it, although not
at all like Philippa instructed. There's no heart stabbing. Saskia adopts her human form, with the wound
still in her chest, and is shockingly rude to Geralt. On this path you've saved her life twice,
kept her greatest secret, helped her win a battle for a new realm where she will rule
as queen, broke the control spell placed on her by Philippa and therefore revealed a horrible
traitor in her group, and sort of saved her life again. And yet you're still curtly dismissed and
told you can only come to Vergen as a guest. Returning to Loc Muinne you will be greeted by either Triss, Roche, or Iorveth. Triss is the only partner you can have while
avoiding the massacre setting. And the opposite is true: you can't be partnered
with Triss if the streets are running red with the blood of mages. For some examples of weirdness here: you can
be attacked by Temerian solders even when you're with Roche in this section. And if you're with Triss after helping Iorveth
in Chapter Two, you can find him heavily wounded in a cart but he will bug out when you speak
near him and he'll walk around just fine and then snap back into unconsciousness when the
dialogue is over. Also if you save Anais and hand her over to
Radovid then Roche will have changed into a Redanian uniform, which was the final change
I saw when playing the games for footage and it honestly freaked me out a little bit. It's like watching your cat eat dog food. He loses this uniform change in Witcher 3. No matter what Triss will be here for the
final confrontation with Letho because he saves her if you don't—after the city erupts
into chaos. Although it's not clear if he does this out
of some obligation he feels toward her or if he's trying to appease you or if he secretly
deep down has a heart of gold. There's no more running after this. If you want you can kill Letho after this
talk—a cinematic won't save him this time. All the cards are laid out and then you choose. And this is the end. It's anti-climactic in more ways than one but
not necessarily in a bad way. This fight is the same as the first round
you have with Letho earlier, only this time it's easier because there's a larger arena
to maneuver through. It's also not personal enough to feel more
epic and grand than the dragon boss that came before it. In fact it's hard to justify fighting him
at all after everything is revealed to you: the only way I can still be mad at him is
because he was an idiot to not simply talk to Geralt sooner. But this feels like a flaw in the writing
rather than himself. Letho is a poor villain because of this but
a good character. After leaving the Isle of Avallach to save
Yennefer from the Wild Hunt, Geralt headed south tracking any sightings of them. He journeyed alone at first which is a considerable
regression from the character development he had at the end of the books but let's leave
that alone. He happens to meet Letho just in time to save
him from being killed by a slyzard. Letho has two other witchers with him: Auckes
and Serrit. The four joined together and managed to attack
the Wild Hunt on a supposedly special night when they weren't wraith-like projections
like the legends say. They cut down flesh and blood enemies but
their numbers were too great. Instead a deal was made: Geralt traded himself
for Yennefer's place, leaving her with Letho and company while our witcher was taken away. This interaction doesn't feel plausible to
me especially given what happens in Witcher 3 but we're not given full context so I'm
just going to pass over it. Yennefer had amnesia, because it's leaving
the Wild Hunt that makes people lose their memory, not leaving the Isle of Avalone. Letho and friends tried to rehabilitate her
but it didn't go well. In no small part because Yennefer's disposition
makes Oscar the Grouch look like a really happy and chipper person. They were eventually captured by Nilfgaard
and imprisoned. That was the last time Letho saw her. We learn that Yennefer told the Emperor of
Nilfgaard about the Lodge of Sorceresses. Letho was separately offered a deal for his
freedom: journey north and destabilize the Northern Kingdoms as much as possible. In return the Emperor will fund a new witcher
school. Letho could resurrect his home guild: The
School of the Viper. And his witcher comrades could return from
isolation. Luckily Letho ran into Sile de Tansarville
and, lulling the Lodge of Sorceresses into a false sense of security, used this connection
to unleash chaos. The Lodge already wanted King Demavend killed
because he was seen to be a weak ruler. They didn't want Foltest dead but by then
the damage was done and Letho's actions would always trace back to the Lodge. Philippa and Sile wanted to control the remaining
rulers, not kill them. Sile was in Flotsam to both deal with Letho
personally and also acquire those medicinal ingredients from the kayran monster. It's also why she tries to kill the assassins
in Chapter Two if you're on the Roche path. Philippa further exploits the situation at
Vergen to have Dethmold killed and Sile replace him as Henselt's only magical advisor. And who knows what else they had planned for
Radovid and Queen Meve, and even Foltest if he had lived. It appears to me that this mirror scene with
Triss in the first game is a possible link to the plans the Lodge had for Temeria through
her. Letho fooled them all and was able to drag
the Lodge of Sorceresses and, depending on your choices, all of the northern magic users
into a frenzy. Two or three kings could be dead. So many mages could be wiped out—and magic
was a key force when repelling invaders in the past. The Northern Realms are weak and in disarray. And here comes Nilfgaard with their third
invasion attempt. That's what all of this has been about. Letho trying to restore his witcher school
and not caring the price he pays to do so. None of it was personal—in fact he's done
you a large favor in looking after Yennefer and it was her fault that he was captured. The events that eventually led to Foltest
being killed were partly set off by the Geralt of the past. So now do you want to fight or make Geralt
hold up his hand in this “you know what I'm sick of your shit never talk to me or
my Triss ever again” pose and then walk off? This also marks the end of any recapping I
have to do. And I am so happy. I'm sorry that I apologised so much about
it. I hope it wasn't too tedious and that most
of you got some enjoyment out of it. Here are my problems: the Lodge of Sorceresses
is not a secret organization. Yet the existence of it is spoken in hallowed
words throughout Witcher 2. Shilard sneakily feels you out about it, trying
to get you to admit that Triss is a part of the group. Meanwhile Triss herself looks like you just
told her you have a romance card of a striga when you reveal you know about it. Radovid acts like the Lodge's existence is a revelation to him even though he brought
it up to you in Witcher 1. There are books written about the Lodge. Commoners in the street know about it in Vizima. It's not a secret, and it's unfortunately
important to Witcher 2's story that it is. I don't know if this is a retcon or a mistake,
but it's a big issue that you have to come to terms with to enjoy this game's story. Secondly this is an artificial conflict. Letho only needed to say “I helped you save
Yennefer, how did you escape from the Wild Hunt?” and that would be the end of the
fight in the bath house. Honestly it probably would have been enough
to halt Geralt in his tracks in the monastary after killing Foltest even. Letho undeniably has a great amount of respect
and affinity for Geralt. They traveled together, fought together, bled
together, probably played Gwent together, and he knows Geralt is the better fighter
if all of his memories were returned. The fact that Letho does shout things at Geralt
during this fight but NOT THIS is incredibly infuriating to me. The writing in these games is usually so far
above horseshit like this and Letho's villainy ultimately isn't that important to the story
so the result doesn't even justify it. Thirdly, Geralt's amnesia is cured during this conversation. Things are flooding back to him. So he has more memories of interacting with
Letho than we do now. Plus a tsunami of new thoughts and emotions
about finding Yennefer and Ciri, and yet fighting Letho after he's done next to nothing to personally
hurt Geralt is still an option? After he might have just saved Triss, too? And let you live in the bullshit “lose in
the cutscene” cop-out in Chapter One. If anything Letho should be the one pushing
to fight if you went the Roche path because Geralt butchered Auckes. But maybe he doesn't because he understands
Geralt's amnesia but then if he does why not try to talk first? And... Do you see what I mean this is messy in a
really bad way. Thankfully Letho is surprisingly unimportant in the grand scheme of things—which are
all messy in a really good way. So let's finally talk about that, the special
kind of story telling that Witcher 2 uses that's entirely separate from the choose-your-own-adventure
branching paths. Witcher 2 has an unreliable narrator in the
form of Dandelion, and it provides a great contrast because we get to experience the
real version of events firsthand with Geralt before hearing Dandelion's embellished recrap. But Geralt himself is in the same unreliable
area just not in the same way that he's lost credibility—it's that his perspective is
so limited. Think of your favorite TV series. Chances are it has an ensemble cast—meaning
that while one character may be the primary protagonist, there are several maybe even
dozens of characters that you will be following with their own stories, struggles, and development. Most movies, games, and books are not like
this—although the more they become serialized with multiple entries that tends to bring
more characters and perspectives. Even then there tend to be fewer “perspective
characters” than in most TV shows with the obvious exception being these really long
drawn out fantasy books which I have a lot of experience with. Let's focus on games though: how many have
you played that have you jumping between different characters that you control scene by scene? There's not many that do that, and the stories
are built to service this Primary-Protagonist, Primary-Perspective mode of storytelling. This means that events and characters gravitate
around the player's actions and planned story path through the entire experience. Events can still happen away from the player
of course, and other characters can still cause change, but it's often done in a divorced
way. If it does link back to the main narrative
of the player character then it's usually explained unambiguously to you. Or there could be side characters that have
an unseen impact on the main story that are given their own tales in spin-off books or
comics or maybe even DLC. Witcher 2 does not do this. Witcher 2 is like a TV series. BUT, its perspective is still like a standard
video game and this is so interesting to me. There are dozens of characters in this game
that have their own plot lines to follow from beginning to end. Some of them even kicked off in Witcher 1
and the books. They all have their starting positions, their
personal motivations, their obligations to others that they care about, and a series
of plans they want to see to fruition and then corrections they make when those plans
are compromised. Roche, Ves, Shilard, Sile, Triss, Philippa,
Letho, Dandelion, Zoltan, Loredo, Henselt, Dethmold, Saskia, Iorveth, and I could go
on and on but I won't. If you've watched this far you know how many
characters are in this story. Even the minor ones have their own plot threads
like this. Given a large enough budget you could fill
in seasons of a TV show with all of the scenes that happen in this story that Geralt never
sees—hundreds like Triss's megascope scene, and the quick jump to controlling Henselt
or Stennis. Every character in this story is the protagonist
of their own tale, which is one of my favorite ways to write and also the type of fiction
that I usually enjoy the most. In this way Witcher 2 is much like Sapkowski's
Witcher Saga books but limited mostly to one perspective, and that's so unusual and cool
to me. I can't think of another game that has done
something like this with both so many characters and such a complex story. This is why this game's narrative is unique
even without the choices and consequences. It's also why it's so damn dense and can be
confusing your first time—although there are other reasons for that too. The story isn't in orbit around Geralt—it's
almost the opposite. The events that have been set in motion here
are too big to stop by erasing just one single character. Geralt could be removed and most of the ending
would be the same. Even Letho could be taken out—do you really
think Foltest not dying would change everything? Just like Henselt dying doesn't seem to change
much either? That Nilfgaard wouldn't have found another
blunt -looking-but-secretly-sharp instrument if they hadn't captured Letho? And that they didn't dispatch others too and
Letho just beat them to the punch? Would Yennefer have been pressured into helping
more? This is exactly what I mean: this beautifully
fluid storytelling. Yes characters cause changes but only ripples
that crash against other ripples that are triggered by reactions to whatever change
would be caused. And isn't that also what you see when you
make changes during your playthroughs? The game does cheat sometimes and I probably
pointed out those instances more than I should have but much of it is fair and it works. I view the story in this game less as a traditional
narrative and more as this cause and effect simulation. But this means there are too many names and
terms and historical events to keep track of. This is also used to provide an interesting
conflict when, somewhere in Chapter Two and after regaining his memories, Geralt will
understand more of the story than you will. Geralt is frightfully intelligent and the
games only show glimpses of that here and there—like this wonderful scene in Witcher
1 when you question people making armaments in a factory and even with amnesia Geralt
correctly concludes there's a civil war brewing in Temeria. For Witcher 2, in order to catch up to him
you really need to play the game twice and arguably also read the books. I think this makes the games more captivating
but it's also quite the flaw if you don't understand the two playthrough requirement—and
many players might not want to do that. If you do then you'll probably enjoy your
second time through more as a story experience which is something I've tried to emulate in
this video with all the recapping. There are many revelations to discover especially
if you went Roche your first time and Iorveth your second. The game definitely wants and expects you
to do this but I don't think it has enough choices early on to pull players back into
the thick of it immediately. If there's a second big flaw in the story,
right below the bafflement many players will go through in Chapter Three if they went with
Roche, then it's this. The choice and consequence engine needed to
get started much sooner. You'll recall, of course, that four hours
earlier in this video I said that Witcher 2 is my least favorite in this trilogy but
also the most interesting. This is the primary reason why. I can't bring myself to call the multiple
playthrough requirement good when not enough of it was developed early on and the gameplay
is something you have to tolerate all over again. But I think a culprit here is how CD Projekt
chose to allocate so many resources when making this game. In short that while on a Double A budget they
kind of caught the Triple A disease. They wanted setpieces. The castle town prologue. The kayran fight. The cursed mist section. And almost all of Loc Muinne. These sections are remarkable in many ways—mostly
visually and in atmosphere. They also clearly took a remarkable amount
of time, effort, and budget to make. All for what amounts to very little of the
game's total playtime. This is what I think is the game's largest
mistake—committing so much to these setpieces. The fundamental gameplay in the Witcher games
is being let loose in an environment to explore, talk, quest, and fight. Witcher 1 is that for almost the whole game. So is Witcher 3. Witcher 2 is only like that in Flotsam and
maybe Vergen but that's a stretch. Chapter Two suffers from its claustrophobic
tunnel network and lower amount of content on each side because the section was split
into two different different paths. Then Chapter Three is tiny. Look again at how much work went into the
environments of this city and its surroundings. Look again at how many streets were built
for La Valette Castle in the Prologue. Look at all the free real estate that could
have been gained if there didn't need to be a gaping magical void in Chapter Two and tight
corridors limiting your access to it. I really like these areas and setpieces but
just imagine how much more freedom the game would have and how much more inline it would
be with Witcher 1 and Witcher 3 if you could wander around these areas freely—talking
to people, getting quests, and so on. Instead they're used quickly, and that's not
necessarily a bad thing, but there's little else here that is the typical type of gameplay
that you find in this series. My assumption is that much more content and
choices were originally planned. I think that's a safe assumption given how
much feels to be missing from Witcher 1 and even Witcher 3. Witcher 2 does not feel unfinished, although
if I played it all before the Enhanced Edition I may have said otherwise, but its overall
quality is just as burnt as the individual pieces. My guess is that these sections I've pointed
out took far more resources than they predicted—like hell the boulders the kayran throws don't
even visibly show up in its tentacle remember? The rest of the game lost opportunities for
development when these sections siphoned resources away. And we're left with startlingly few chances
to get into the fundamental gameplay structure of the series and fewer choices and consequences
than I think there should be to truly justify two playthroughs. Not to mention how short the game is. Even though the story does feel complete,
at the risk of engaging in hyperbole it feels like an entire chapter is missing. But that's fitting because that burnt quality
that I keep bringing up is a really good indicator of something that I think happened during
the end of this game's development. It was burnt out. A feeling I can definitely relate to after
making these videos. I can see the juggling that went on when making
this game. I can feel the exasperation and how I'm certain
that there wasn't a single person on the dev team that had the full game in their heads
by the end. Everyone on the team was at least a little
lost and it was finished it an angry frenzy: "I thought you fixed that" "I thought you
did!" "I did fix it" "Then why isn't it working?" “Why isn't there announcements when you
get a secret perk?” “I thought you already did that” “Well
they're not in there” “Well go and check” "Well I can't play this fucking thing again!" JUST SHIP IT. JUST FUCKING SHIP IT. And I mean... that's every game right? But this time it's a much more complex creatively,
and also in Polish. Which would probably make it sound angrier. There's too many scenes and lines that go
nowhere. And far too many contradictions. “I know his weakness” “We have unfinished
business” “Ves is lying” You don't ever see Philippa on the Roche path yet you see
Dethmold on the Iorveth line. Roche and Iorveth's battle in Flotsam feels
so much like the prelude to another big confrontation that never happens. There's all the inconsistencies between the
two different paths in Chapter Two. Why do they reuse the garden for the meeting
with Letho when that doesn't make any sense? And even little things that are so easily
forgotten like the Furtive Pygmy of details. For a quick example it's really important
to break this ballista when you go and see the commandant with Roche, but it's never
important and never comes back up again. There's a lot of things like that. By the time we get to the end of Chapter Two
the the ugly truth has been revealed: that there are too many balls to keep in the air. Witcher 1 has a bunch of decisions throughout
its playthrough and then a big split at its ENDING. Witcher 2 has a bunch of decisions and put
its big split 1/3 of the way in, and then had even more decisions after that. Witcher 2 was an experiment for CD Projekt. Narrative choices. Action combat. Breaking in a new game engine. Bethesda wonders what that's like. We also know in hindsight that it feels like
a Prologue game to the monolithic Witcher 3. It's an experiment with mixed results with
the majority of them being a success—but it's a “government party won an election”
kind of majority. Not an overwhelmingly positive on steam kind
of majority. It was an incredibly difficult idea to explore
and realize and yet they still went for it the madlads. I have no doubt that making this game drove
at least a few people crazy. People screamed at each other. And here I am pointing out its failures. I want to make sure I am also praising it
as much as it deserves. Which is a lot. But we're not done. Because at the end here you also may have
picked up on that the story lacks an emotional core because of this experimental nature. Geralt isn't important he's just along for
the ride. Yennefer and Ciri are once again absent. There's no reveal at the end to tie it all
together like they did with Alvin in Witcher 1. Dandelion and Triss are barely in it. In fact aside from Roche there's hardly one
character you can point to that is present for much of the run-time, and even then that's
only on Roche's own route. Hell, Letho is barely in the game either. The story is instead a serviceable bundle
to facilitate the narrative experiment. Right? Well, actually, I don't think so. I think there is an emotional core here after
all. And that emotion is, perhaps quite fittingly,
... frustration. This moment in the courtyard is a big deal for Geralt and it's one that players are kept
separate from. Unless you turn the game off in the middle
of this conversation and read all of the books, then it's only Geralt the character that regains
his memory. And if you've already read the books before
this then you already knew all of it and only Geralt is now coming out of the darkness. This is the death and birth of one of the
Geralts: Book Geralt has been dead for a while, Amnesia Geralt is dying right in front of
us, and we witness the creation of Post-Amnesia Game Geralt. He has the full context of his life back in
his head but also the memories of when he couldn't remember. This weaves everything together: the books,
Witcher 1 and 2, and feeds into the staging for Witcher 3. I love how high CD Projekt's writing can reach
that they managed to thread all of that through a narrative experiment like this. That it draws on the annoyance you feel and
even how overwhelmed you might be at all the names and events and faces. Foltest is dead. Nobles are vying for power. Politics, politics, politics. Go to Flotsam. Deal with bullshit. Go to Vergen. Deal with more bullshit. Now we have to keep going to Loc Muinne? What the fuck is a Loc Muinne? Why is this summit even happening? Who are all of these people? What parts of this are important? A dragon? Philippa? Sile? Who's right, who's wrong? Is Triss a friend or a foe? Is Letho a friend or a foe? Can I really trust Roche or Iorveth and does
Saskia really have the pure intentions that she appears to have? Am I even doing the right thing with any of
these decisions? Pull it back further. Geralt has been on this wild ride for at least
seven months. Maybe even a year because it's unclear how
much time passes in each Chapter of the first two games. Wake up. Why aren't you dead? We're your friends, trust us. This is Triss, trust her. We're under attack! Help us. Avenge us. Travel the world. Get wrapped up in curses and monsters and
resolving the problems of horrible people who brought most of it on themselves. Politics, politics, politics. Leuvaarden uses you. Triss uses you. Adda uses you. Then Foltest. Maybe the Order or the Scoia'tael depending
on your choices. Then you unintentionally make a child grow
up to be a monster and are forced to kill him. Because of all of this Geralt is stuck. He can't leave. He's a victim of a series of accidents. He's tripped and fallen into the role of a
king's man. Fall into a romance with Triss now. Follow the king. Save the king. Fight for the king. He's just about to be released of his obligations...
...and then Letho ruins it all. Look at this wondrous agony on display here—how
cause and effect can knock on and on and on because Geralt doesn't have the wisdom and
presence to match his combat capabilities. And as you can see from the length of just
this video of THREE IN A SERIES, look at the convoluted mess that he's forced to navigate
through while being half blind and unsure if even those who claim to be his trusted
friends truly know what's best for him. Those who have continually failed to tell
him about the most important two people in his life: Yennefer and Ciri. The people who he didn't seek out to help
him after he left the Isle of Avalon. He just went straight to it all on his own. Go from one King to another. You're a mutant. A freak. People spit on you in the streets. Risk your life fighting monsters without really
knowing how to do it. Kill one of your own witcher kind without
really knowing why. Now you're a Kingslayer. No one is ever grateful for what you do—not
for the big heroics any way. And the natural triumph of those victories
is often snatched away because horrible people profit from them. A monster or a curse should be an objectively
bad thing. Should be. It's a part and parcel of the terms themselves. But a monster could be preventing another,
worse monster from committing evil. A curse can be a dam that holds back a flood. Then Geralt finally gets to here. His memories are back and he's free. Loc Muinne is either a massacred ruin or being
locked away by newly elevated mages. Either way he loses his amnesia like waking
up from a nightmare—the fog clearing—into another nightmare. The Kings and nobles have left—not one of
them saying a word of thanks to Geralt the Dragonslayer, and there's no one left to say
here's what we're doing next, Geralt. Triss or Roche or Iorveth could try but it
wouldn't work. Geralt is back and he's free. Which is what I think this oddly out of place
ladybug is meant to represent in this final scene. Frustration into release. A cathartic ending. A beautiful breaking point. It's the conclusion of this stage of the free
will experiment. All of choices lead you to here no matter
what. The journey has been different but the conclusion
is the same. There's an elasticity to your decisions—a
different Geralt could be standing here before his memory came back, but this is always where
he'll be standing. And I have to wonder if that says something
about a person's drive and ideals, the core of who they are, being a constant despite
the decisions they make. This is also a catharsis that many players
may feel if they just want to get to Witcher 3. They're now done with the “old, bad games”
and can play the shiny new one. I disagree with that of course but I'm well
aware that many people only like the third game in this trilogy. Plus it's a great match to the change in structure
with the next game—Witcher 3 is open world and allows for much freer exploration that's
paired with Geralt finally being free of the last several months of amnesiac torment. Interestingly, the first two books also do
something like this with a big change occurring at the end of them that continues with the
five book saga that follows, which is really like one continuous story split into five
volumes. And having recognized that emotional core,
that concludes Witcher 2. There are different versions of the final
scenes depending on your recent choices, plus an ending montage that gives you some drips
of information on what happened next—to Flotsam, to Anais, to Philippa, and so on. Sadly most of these do a poor job at setting
up continuity for Witcher 3 because most of it is ignored. Saskia never returns whether she lives or
dies. Even if the game ends with Philippa still
having direct control over one of the last living dragons in the world, Saskia is never
brought up again. Philippa comes back though. And Geralt will never admonish her for her
attempt at burning down Loc Muinne and trying to kill hundreds of people. Iorveth is never seen again. If you didn't kill Henselt then CD Projekt
will, in a battle between Kaedwen and Redania sometime soon. Nilfgaard invades from the south and renders
your results in Flotsam and Vergen void. Some of these endings also do a better job
at setting up things than others. It makes more sense to me that Radovid was
able to invade Kaedwen and unite the North against Nilfgaard if Henselt was killed in
Vergen. Radovid also becomes a “mad king” in Witcher
3—driven insane by the burden of leadership. Speaking to Siegfried about the king in addition
to the choice that leaves Loc Muinne in bloody ruination are the only hints that set this
up enough to feel like it doesn't come out of nowhere. And you could miss them entirely. In fact it's likely that you will. There's also the problem with Geralt's status
in the world. If you go with the Roche path you can be pardoned
by Henselt, Radovid, and also free Anais who can tell the truth about who killed Foltest. The true Kingslayers are revealed at the end
regardless but Geralt could still be suspected of working with them. They are witchers after all. On the Iorveth line you will be hated by Temeria,
Kaedwen, possibly alienated the nobles of Aedirn or led their Prince to his death, receive
no support from Radovid at all and may even be imprisoned by him, plus Queen Meve also
hates Geralt due to his actions in the books. Witcher 3 starts with Geralt possibly being
the most wanted criminal that he has ever been, and yet none of it matters and he's
free to roam with Vesemir without being badgered. It's another reason why I think a canon ending
should be chosen for each game, especially Witcher 3 for the inevitable Witcher 4 or
whatever spin-off continuation happens. Like Geralt, Witcher 2 is a captivating mutant
of a game and shows the strength of a concept that deserves more development. Hopefully by CD Projekt themselves. I wonder how differently I would view the
game if it had combat that was properly enjoyable. How much would that elevate the different
choices and paths if gameplay was a lure to see it all again? We'll never know. I'm happy this game exists. I never want to play it again.
The Witcher 2 was my favorite game from the time it came out until 3. It's hard to overstate how impressed I was by the really bold decision in Act 2 to almost completely split the game based on a decision you make, and really give you a different perspective on the events and politics in the world depending on which side you were on.
It's a huge risk, considering how expensive games are to develop, to make it so that the average player will miss between a third and a half of the game's content on a given playthrough.
I actually like critiques like this as i love raycevik, mathewmatosis etc. Many games they critique on are either indie or highly overhyped games.
I just like seeing critisism of games with high Metacritic score even though i love them, seperated from hype and fanboyism. Makes me see a new perspective and help me notice things i missed.
As for video length, I don't mind. JA goes in excruciatingly little details which i love. I don't agree with him many times but its fine because its often interesting.
Went into this thread expecting at least some interesting discussion about The Witcher 2. Left with people bitching about the video length, people bitching about people bitching about the video length, or people bitching about the creator. Great stuff.
Just finished watching. It was entertaining and informative. Thank you for reading my 7-page review and critique on Joseph Anderson.
Though for real. I really like his style of going through the game so everyone is following along and giving his opinions and critiques on mechanics and events that happen. It's like watching a condensed let's play with lots of personally sprinkled across.
The problem with these threads is no one talks about the video. The discussion always devolves to is Joseph good or is Joseph bad, it’s pointless
I think people who dislike Joseph's videos often misidentify what their actual problem with the video is, instead saying it's solely due to length. While that's probably the case for some people, for me I don't think that's the full story. Length is not inherently bad, but the ways in which these videos ar long makes that length less justifiable. However, his fans, particularly the diehard ones, love the length. The problem is that this had lead to an environment where I feel Joseph is encouraged to double down on these aspects rather than address them. Despite this, even as somebody who's very critical of his work, his first Witcher video was great! Not perfect, but certainly among his better work. in some parts it was a massive improvement, avoiding several common problems and highlighting just how much more interesting he can be when he's being positive, and in others an unwieldy nightmare emblematic of all his worst habits and most indulgent excesses.
Joe's actual biggest problems are the way he often misses the forest for the trees, getting caught up on things that aren't important to his overall point, and his tendency to repeat himself out of a desire to provide exhaustive evidence for his points.
For the first, he'll often approach certain aspects of a game with a handwave and others with a deep diving numbers crunching analysis, with little rhyme or reason. Notably, in Breath of the Wild, he gives the exploration some very well earned praise, but it only lasts about 10 minutes. The remaining 90 minutes are picking the game apart for its merely serviceable combat and puzzle solving, and while he makes good points throughout, it doesn't change the fact that he barely even scratches the surface on the game's best aspects. This is particularly a shame because he's at his best when he's talking about a game he likes, and often breaking down the details on why we like things in media is far more interesting and helpful than the inverse. When he makes a video about a game he claims is one of the best games he's ever played and barely a tenth of it is actually positive, it's indicative of misplaced priorities.
On the second point, Joseph often derails himself with extended sections of script that are absolutely useless to the video. His hour long breakdown of why God of War doesn't work well on its absolute highest difficulty, while technically good work, is an absolute slog to sit through. More recently, his extended anecdote that he returns to frequently about the witch in Witcher 1 whom he read too much into occupies a lot of script, and bleeds into unrelated segments of the script as well, despite basically being him seeing the potential for a plotline that the devs just never intended to exist. These are egregious when his videos are already so overlong that he should be chomping at the bit to slim down the runtime.
Finally, the third point. The extremely detailed plot recaps, the exhaustive numbers breakdowns of damage scaling and level calculation, the point by point analysis of every single individual bit of content in a game. This is, in essence, the main event, and it is also by far the least engaging part of his work. I see people argue that these are important, because it lets the viewer know he's not leaving anything out and makes his points harder to argue against, but that's not actually true at all. Noah Gervais does fucking phenomenal work where he'll make far more interesting points about a game in far less time, primarily by only demonstrating what evidence he needs to make those points. It's not that the videos are long, I love Noah's several hours long franchise retrospectives. It's that they're only so long because of the inclusion of an absolutely unnecessary amount of detail, and if you were to cut out that level of detail you'd end up with a dramatically improved product.
I have proof: he's done it already. Videos like Stephen's sausage rolls and edith finch are among his best work specifically because he avoids the pitfalls of his usual work. He has a point to make, some interesting insights, and he shows what he has to show to get it all across. It's great, it's engaging, and it's exactly what he needs to do more of.
He has other issues that he's improved on a lot recently -- he does far less baseless speculation about the development process, which universally damaged his points due to how ridiculous it was; he's commented on and is trying to refrain from recommending ways to "fix" a game; and, mercifully, he seems to be less interested in trying to break down game mechanics to analyze them, instead choosing to spend that time on analyzing the script which I feel is still wasted time, but to a lesser degree. I've yet to watch his second witcher video here, as it's very long and I'd need a good opportunity to watch it all, but so long as he continues on the trajectory of that video in every way but one, he looks poised to improve dramatically.
The one thing I hope he avoids is the bloat. A long video can also be a great one, but not if the interesting part of the video is barely even a sixth of that runtime. Joseph Anderson is a smart man, and even when I disagree with him it's clear he thinks most of what he says through very carefully. If his videos were condensed to only these interesting sections, without the chaff, he'd be fantastic -- I'd gladly watch a three-four hour video on the full witcher franchise in detail. But as is, his videos often come across as particularly well researched plot synopses rather than analyses, and it's a damn shame.
Though, I do wish people wouldn't write his work off as being just long and nothing else. The man has things to say, but he takes so long to get around to saying them that it's easy to interpret the loooong stretches of vestigial script as being proof that he's got nothing to say at all.
This is an entertaining video sorely in need of a good editor.
He's always taking half an hour to describe something that could have been said in 10 minutes. There is depth to the commentary, but equally often he just rephrases the same point over and over.
I'd reccomend putting this on, but in the background. I'm making this comment two hours into the video.
Edit: Five hours in and finished: So I enjoyed this as someone who has very recently played all of Witcher 3 for the first time without touching the earlier two games. This scratched an itch that I had. But now it's done I'm not sure what exactly this video was trying to do.
If you want to watch a video recap of Witcher 2, this is probably your best bet. But it's padded beyond belief. Structuring his thoughts in a stream-of-consciousness style as they popped up chronologically through a play through has really hurt it. And his discussions of mechanics are overly thorough. You really don't need a fifteen to twenty minute explanation on why it's frustrating that hitboxes and hitframes don't match the animation.
So much of the video (way upwards of an hour) is just summarising the plot and how it branches. It felt so often that we were edging towards criticism more interesting than "this doesn't matter" or "this is janky" or "this is interesting" but that's when he chooses to move on, or select another example. When he's summarising the plot, it's like reading an academic essay where every paragraph is missing the last two sentences.
I really did enjoy it, primarily as a summary of what the second game covered, but I don't rate this video for it's discussion of mechanics nor any sort of analysis. And even as a plot summary, it's so broken up between everything else that I really can't rate it as time efficient. Everyone who opened the video, saw it was five hours long, and the video wasn't structured in a meaningful way, and then criticised it - their inferences were correct.
I feel like these videos are only good if I'm never going to play a game but want to know about it. I'm terrible at puzzle games so The Witness and Return of the Obra Dinn videos he did were really great for me to watch. A 5 hour video explaining the plot about a game I've already played all the way through just doesn't seem worth it.
I realize a lot of people didn't play the second Witcher so this'll be a great video if you want to learn everything about the game.
People can hate on this all they want but his Witcher 1 essay was brilliant so I was really looking forward to this one. I really don't get the backlash.