🚀 go-pugleaf

On 5/20/2015 6:32 AM, Werner Punz wrote:
> Hi I was just asking, because I have started to play the game yesterday
> and I like it a lot.
>
> It even plays nicely on my low end rig (NVidia 660). Even on low
> settings the game looks really good. (I have to play with the settings
> further today, according to a friend of mine with a rather similar rig,
> you can raise some of the settings to high without impact, the hair
> however needs to be turned off that is a frame rate killer on low to mid
> range cards)
>
> I have played for two hours yesterday and I am still in the starting
> village doing sidequests. From what I could notice is that even the
> sidequests seem to vary a lot and seem to be hand scripted.
>
> The game is really huge, btw.
>
> The only downside so far I noticed is, there are lots of NPCs you cannot
> talk to they just mumble 1-2 sentences, however that is to be expected I
> guess. And yes the in game fonts could be bigger.
>
> Werner
>
>
>
>
I just started the game and didn't have a chance to get any farther than 
the humorous opening scene. The game does really look good. I've run 
with the default settings as far as the graphics, but I have a GTX980, 
so I'm hoping I don't have to fiddle with them too much.

Lots of folks complaining about crashing but apparently changing the 
default screen to play in full screen mode solves that issue.

I do like the more polished looking GUI. More to follow as I get into it.

D.

On Wed, 20 May 2015 12:32:02 +0200, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:

>Hi I was just asking, because I have started to play the game yesterday 
>and I like it a lot.

I installed it on day-of-release and played it through the initial
tutorial levels. However, I still have a number of other games pending
so that's where I stopped.

My initial impressions were not as favorable, but that's not
unexpected. While I quite enjoy the world of the Witcher, I never have
really warmed up to the games. Performance was more sluggish than I
expected, especially given the visual fidelity, which was not really
any more impressive than other modern games. Admittedly, I bumped
everything up to "ultra" and if I tweak the graphic settings a bit I'm
sure I'll get a far better framerate, but even "ultra" didn't look any
better than, say, Wolfenstein:New Order, which runs at a smooth 60fps.

Meanwhile, the extremely limited interactions of the gameworld - which
have always been a hallmark of the series - make the world feel static
and primitive. Now, admittedly being able to open every chest of
drawers or pick the forks off the table wouldn't necessarily make for
a better story but it would make the world feel more immersive and
real. I guess I've just been spoiled by Skyrim.

I didn't like the combat system either, but that's always been a weak
spot of the Witcher franchise. It definitely wasn't helped by the
low-framerate; I'll see if I find it less annoying once I disable some
of the GPU-killing render-options.

Still, I'll be the first to admit I haven't really given the game a
chance so my opinion of the game is extremely tentative. But honestly,
I purchased the game more to show my support for GOG (and DRM-free
titles in general) than out of a fantatical devotion to the series.

>>
>

Am 20.05.15 um 15:33 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
> On Wed, 20 May 2015 12:32:02 +0200, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
>
>> Hi I was just asking, because I have started to play the game yesterday
>> and I like it a lot.
>
> I installed it on day-of-release and played it through the initial
> tutorial levels. However, I still have a number of other games pending
> so that's where I stopped.
>
> My initial impressions were not as favorable, but that's not
> unexpected. While I quite enjoy the world of the Witcher, I never have
> really warmed up to the games. Performance was more sluggish than I
> expected, especially given the visual fidelity, which was not really
> any more impressive than other modern games. Admittedly, I bumped
> everything up to "ultra" and if I tweak the graphic settings a bit I'm
> sure I'll get a far better framerate, but even "ultra" didn't look any
> better than, say, Wolfenstein:New Order, which runs at a smooth 60fps.
>
Actually turn off the hair animation, this made a huge difference for 
me. The rest of the settings are not that much of a framerate killer.
I now have most settings on high with a few selected in the low range 
and it runs fine between 30 and 60fps on my NVidia 660 rig. I dont 
expect a full 60fps+ given my low end gaming machine. But its good to 
see that it still can handle the game fine. Which means I can postpone a 
graphics card update for another year or two.


> Meanwhile, the extremely limited interactions of the gameworld - which
> have always been a hallmark of the series - make the world feel static
> and primitive. Now, admittedly being able to open every chest of
> drawers or pick the forks off the table wouldn't necessarily make for
> a better story but it would make the world feel more immersive and
> real. I guess I've just been spoiled by Skyrim.
>
Actually the gameworld interactivity is mostly the same as in Witcher 2, 
important NPCs (even the sidequest NPCs) have handcrafted dialogs, the 
rest are bystanders who mumble a few sentences. The interactivity 
regarding the environment is pretty much the same as it used to be. You 
can collect herbs and ingredients and you can loot special objects which 
you can sense with your Witcher sense and also you can use some objects 
which are also highlighted by the Witcher sense and you also can burn 
down or can push away obstacles with your witcher spells.
Its not as interactive as for instance Divinity Original Sin, but it is 
also not a non interactive as Baldurs Gate or Pillars of Eternity.


> I didn't like the combat system either, but that's always been a weak
> spot of the Witcher franchise. It definitely wasn't helped by the
> low-framerate; I'll see if I find it less annoying once I disable some
> of the GPU-killing render-options.
>
Actually I like the combat system more than in Witcher 2, it still is 
far from ideal but definitely improved.

On Wed, 20 May 2015 12:32:02 +0200, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:

>Hi I was just asking, because I have started to play the game yesterday 
>and I like it a lot.
>
>It even plays nicely on my low end rig (NVidia 660). Even on low 
>settings the game looks really good. (I have to play with the settings 
>further today, according to a friend of mine with a rather similar rig, 
>you can raise some of the settings to high without impact, the hair 
>however needs to be turned off that is a frame rate killer on low to mid 
>range cards)
>
>I have played for two hours yesterday and I am still in the starting 
>village doing sidequests. From what I could notice is that even the 
>sidequests seem to vary a lot and seem to be hand scripted.
>
>The game is really huge, btw.
>
>The only downside so far I noticed is, there are lots of NPCs you cannot 
>talk to they just mumble 1-2 sentences, however that is to be expected I 
>guess. And yes the in game fonts could be bigger.
>
>Werner

Since I liked Witcher 1 and 2 well enough, I bought this thinking the
series would have evolved to the point where some of the niggles of
the first two would be overcome.

Early impressions are that they've taken a step back.  The graphics
appear to be roughly in the ballpark of W2, not really an improvement.
The controls feel weird, and I'm getting the impression CDPR has sold
out to the console generation at a time when most other game devs are
going the other way, finally realizing the long-term potential of the
PC platform and making sure the warts are worked out of the PC
versions before release.  

Something about the keyboard and mouse control feels screwy.  Being
locked to 60 fps is fucking pathetic on a high end machine.  It's
trying to be a game for Nvidia owners, but 144fps GSYNC'd is the new
NVidia standard, they appear to be about 5 years behind the times.
60fps is no longer acceptable once you've gotten used to proper frame
rates.

Oh, and the movement keys cannot be bound to something other than
WASD.  And they want to think they are producing AAA games?

Fucking laughable.  I was in it all of about 15 minutes then decide I
better wait for the first patch.

Seems to be the work of some idiot pollocks to me.

Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>Seems to be the work of some idiot pollocks to me.

Were you referring to the American abstract expressionist painter, or
the fish?

You used the plural, so either both, or just the fish.

Now why you think a dead painter and/or some fish were responsible is
the question.

Xocyll
-- 
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of 
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably, 
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So 
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr 

Reviews are good but say graphics need tweaking
& PC version really needs a Gamepad Controller
I have mixed feelings re. the 1 & 2 Witcher  games.
I am hoping on this W3 but not until a few patches.

The attraction of the Witcher's is complex story & characters.
I really like that idea but wonder if the demands of Video games for action
& hunt around puzzles contradicts the story flow so the player really can't 
concentrate
on both.
@@@mouse@@@ 

On Thu, 21 May 2015 01:11:26 +0100, "Trimble Bracegirdle"
<no-spam@never.spam> wrote:

>Reviews are good but say graphics need tweaking
>& PC version really needs a Gamepad Controller
>I have mixed feelings re. the 1 & 2 Witcher  games.
>I am hoping on this W3 but not until a few patches.
>
>The attraction of the Witcher's is complex story & characters.
>I really like that idea but wonder if the demands of Video games for action
>& hunt around puzzles contradicts the story flow so the player really can't 
>concentrate
>on both.
>@@@mouse@@@ 

That was part of my first impression, that they tested it with a
gamepad controller without considering keyboard playability.  What?
>From the GOG.com douchebags?

For something like a decade, gaming got sucked into consolitis, all
its promises and broken dreams.  Right when the rest of the world
seems to have begun to discover the type of grease that will help it
dislodge its own head from its ass, CDPR/GOG whatever goes and
executes the world's least funny polack joke by taking what was
previously a VERY PC oriented series backward about 5 years.

What amazes me thus far is that on a dual gtx980 rig, which runs
everything else pretty much flawlessly, graphics are stuttery for
those that have the eyesight to see the difference.  

And, in the rare case you take a moment to pretend to be living with
disabled hand-eye coordination and start playing like a fucking granny
on a heroin run, you start to notice that the graphics themselves
aren't really impressive or worth the effort.

Honestly I think the control and graphics are fixable problems, but
charging me for an AAA title first and working out the bugs later is
not acceptable anymore.

Locked at 60fps?  Oh boy.  Locked into 2004 technology but paying a
2015 price for it.

Oh, did I mention that I can't adjust my game volume while the game is
running? 

I hope it is only some technical warts to get worked out, because I do
want to play the game.  Some of the Witcher series games dialog is the
most fun I've had in an RPG game.  

However they have shaken my confidence greatly with this one.  I won't
pay more than $10 for their second rate titles on sale going forward
after this.  I'm grudge bearing like that :)

Am 21.05.15 um 04:49 schrieb Rin Stowleigh:
> On Thu, 21 May 2015 01:11:26 +0100, "Trimble Bracegirdle"
> <no-spam@never.spam> wrote:
>

> What amazes me thus far is that on a dual gtx980 rig, which runs
> everything else pretty much flawlessly, graphics are stuttery for
> those that have the eyesight to see the difference.
>
Turn off the hair works or the antialiasing connected to it, apparently 
there is a problem with the hairworks code from NVidia, it has some 
antialiasing turned on on the hair once you turn off AA on the hair even 
the hair special effect should nicely. There is an ini hack for that.

The Witcher 3\bin\config\base\rendering.ini
Search for >
HairWorksAALevel (default its set to 8)

Choose 4 2 or 0 for good fps boost with hairworks active.

Choosing 2 instead of 8 gives around 10fps boost according to some 
people on steam.

source: http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?p=5075492

Hairworks is the main performance killer for me, but apparently I have a 
low end rig, so ymmv.

Werner

On 5/20/2015 2:58 PM, Xocyll wrote:
> Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Seems to be the work of some idiot pollocks to me.
>
> Were you referring to the American abstract expressionist painter, or
> the fish? You used the plural, so either both, or just the fish.
>
> Now why you think a dead painter and/or some fish were responsible is
> the question.

Never thought I'd say this but I got a good laugh from your post, Mr. 
Xocyll. However why anyone would want to belittle an entire nation just 
because of a few decisions made by a team of people making something as 
trivial and inconsequential as a video game is the real question to me.

Am 21.05.15 um 02:11 schrieb Trimble Bracegirdle:
> Reviews are good but say graphics need tweaking
> & PC version really needs a Gamepad Controller
Apparently given the negative comments from users who use the mouse and 
keyboard (which is a no go for most third person games for me, I always 
have the feeling wsad on a third person game feels more clunky than 
using the xbox controller, first person is the opposite there I stay 
away from controllers)

I play with an xbox controller and the control scheme feels quite ok to 
me, swimming however and diving is not that well solved.
The game definitely is designed with a controller in mind. This also is 
apparent in the games menu structure.

The biggest gripe I have with the UI is the fonts which are way to 
small. This hopefully will be fixed in an update. I am not alone with 
this complaint. Ah yes and it is annoying that you dont have a shortcut 
to the map with the controller it is always 2-3 button clicks into the 
map and out. This might be better with a keyboard.

> I have mixed feelings re. the 1 & 2 Witcher  games.
> I am hoping on this W3 but not until a few patches.
>
> The attraction of the Witcher's is complex story & characters.
> I really like that idea but wonder if the demands of Video games for action
> & hunt around puzzles contradicts the story flow so the player really
> can't concentrate
> on both.

Actually I personally think they made a good mixture,
even the sidequests do not contradict the story flow
and are hand scripted with full voice overs.
Some sidequests cannot be solved anymore once you progress with the 
story (happened to me yesterday)

In article <i4mplatvib8arliqp...@4ax.com>, Xoc...@gmx.com 
says...
> 
> Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> looked up from reading the
> entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
> say:
> 
> >Seems to be the work of some idiot pollocks to me.
> 
> Were you referring to the American abstract expressionist painter, or
> the fish?
> 
> You used the plural, so either both, or just the fish.
> 
> Now why you think a dead painter and/or some fish were responsible is
> the question.
> 
> Xocyll


I rather like Pollock's paintings (not at all familiar with the fish).
However, Kandinsky's "Composition VIII" is still top of the pops for me. 
:-)

Anyway, your .sig seems  strangely appropriate for some bigot making a 
fool of itself by not even knowing how to spell ethnic slander (what's 
new?). 

Heh,   -P.

On Wed, 20 May 2015 19:02:33 +0200, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:

>Am 20.05.15 um 15:33 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
>> On Wed, 20 May 2015 12:32:02 +0200, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi I was just asking, because I have started to play the game yesterday
>>> and I like it a lot.
>>
>> I installed it on day-of-release and played it through the initial
>> tutorial levels. However, I still have a number of other games pending
>> so that's where I stopped.
>>
>> My initial impressions were not as favorable, but that's not
>> unexpected. While I quite enjoy the world of the Witcher, I never have
>> really warmed up to the games. Performance was more sluggish than I
>> expected, especially given the visual fidelity, which was not really
>> any more impressive than other modern games. Admittedly, I bumped
>> everything up to "ultra" and if I tweak the graphic settings a bit I'm
>> sure I'll get a far better framerate, but even "ultra" didn't look any
>> better than, say, Wolfenstein:New Order, which runs at a smooth 60fps.
>>
>Actually turn off the hair animation, this made a huge difference for 
>me. The rest of the settings are not that much of a framerate killer.

Thanks, I can confirm that is a useful tip. I saw that suggested on a
website and had disabled it last night. It doubled my framerate and I
didn't see a difference in the visuals. Of course, I still don't think
the graphics are all that impressive overall; not bad, but hardly as
earth-shattering as the press-releases made it seem.

>Actually the gameworld interactivity is mostly the same as in Witcher 2, 
>important NPCs (even the sidequest NPCs) have handcrafted dialogs, the 
>rest are bystanders who mumble a few sentences. 

I know, and it annoys me. I didn't like that limitation in the first
two games either. I want to be able to pick up and move everything.
Plus it seems sort of a waste to render all that stuff if it serves no
purpose.

Anyway, I played a bit more last night - long enough to get to the
first village - before I quit. The gritty low-fantasy setting reminded
me so much of my old pen-n-paper D&D campaign that I had to stop and
pull out the dice and rulebooks to reminisce instead :)

On Thu, 21 May 2015 19:53:47 +1200, Peter Huebner
<p.w.h...@gmail.com> wrote:

>In article <i4mplatvib8arliqp...@4ax.com>, Xoc...@gmx.com 
>says...
>> 
>> Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> looked up from reading the
>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
>> say:
>> 
>> >Seems to be the work of some idiot pollocks to me.
>> 
>> Were you referring to the American abstract expressionist painter, or
>> the fish?
>> 
>> You used the plural, so either both, or just the fish.
>> 
>> Now why you think a dead painter and/or some fish were responsible is
>> the question.
>> 
>> Xocyll
>
>
>I rather like Pollock's paintings (not at all familiar with the fish).
>However, Kandinsky's "Composition VIII" is still top of the pops for me. 
>:-)
>
>Anyway, your .sig seems  strangely appropriate for some bigot making a 
>fool of itself by not even knowing how to spell ethnic slander (what's 
>new?). 
>
>Heh,   -P.

My typos and misspellings are part of my "digital signature" :).  If
you see a sizable post claiming to originate from my keyboard that
doesn't have at least one, please report the imposter to the
authorities.

So you know, urban dictionary (a most appropriate source for terms
like this) recognizes my spelling as correct.  So you're wrong there.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pollock

Polack/Pollock/Polok etc can all be used interchangeably at the whim
of the wielder.

But, you should know it's not really an "ethnic slander".  At least
here in the US it is somewhat of a dated slang word (which in itself
makes it funny) to refer to a general git/dolt whatever that is
independent of their nationality, and that is the context with which I
was using it.

It's kind of serendipitous fun (and pun) that the devs are Polish, but
that's their fault and not mine.  lol

On 5/20/2015 6:32 AM, Werner Punz wrote:
> Hi I was just asking, because I have started to play the game yesterday
> and I like it a lot.
>
> It even plays nicely on my low end rig (NVidia 660). Even on low
> settings the game looks really good. (I have to play with the settings
> further today, according to a friend of mine with a rather similar rig,
> you can raise some of the settings to high without impact, the hair
> however needs to be turned off that is a frame rate killer on low to mid
> range cards)
>
> I have played for two hours yesterday and I am still in the starting
> village doing sidequests. From what I could notice is that even the
> sidequests seem to vary a lot and seem to be hand scripted.
>
> The game is really huge, btw.
>
> The only downside so far I noticed is, there are lots of NPCs you cannot
> talk to they just mumble 1-2 sentences, however that is to be expected I
> guess. And yes the in game fonts could be bigger.
>
> Werner
>
>
>
>
I've gotten to the first village as well. My problem is that I'm easily 
distracted by stuff/quests in the environment.

I haven't decided yet on kb/mouse or controller. I think the controller 
is tougher on my RSI'd thumbs.

I enjoyed the interface on the 1st Witcher better; the fonts don't 
bother me and FWIW patch 1.03 out earlier today seems to have helped 
some players a good deal. Right at the moment I'm not as enamored with 
the game as I thought I'd be. I don't know how to describe it, but the 
whole thing seems "clunky" to me. I haven't given it much of a chance tho'

d.

Am 21.05.15 um 15:52 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
ers who mumble a few sentences.
>
> I know, and it annoys me. I didn't like that limitation in the first
> two games either. I want to be able to pick up and move everything.
> Plus it seems sort of a waste to render all that stuff if it serves no
> purpose.
>
Mhh if you like fully interactive worlds then go for Ultima 7, the 
Underworlds, Arx Fatalis or Divinity Original sin. No game comes even 
remotely close to those interactivity wise.

Werner

On Thu, 21 May 2015 08:12:07 +0200, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:

>Am 21.05.15 um 04:49 schrieb Rin Stowleigh:
>> On Thu, 21 May 2015 01:11:26 +0100, "Trimble Bracegirdle"
>> <no-spam@never.spam> wrote:
>>
>
>> What amazes me thus far is that on a dual gtx980 rig, which runs
>> everything else pretty much flawlessly, graphics are stuttery for
>> those that have the eyesight to see the difference.
>>
>Turn off the hair works or the antialiasing connected to it, apparently 
>there is a problem with the hairworks code from NVidia, it has some 
>antialiasing turned on on the hair once you turn off AA on the hair even 
>the hair special effect should nicely. There is an ini hack for that.
>
>The Witcher 3\bin\config\base\rendering.ini
>Search for >
>HairWorksAALevel (default its set to 8)
>
>Choose 4 2 or 0 for good fps boost with hairworks active.
>
>Choosing 2 instead of 8 gives around 10fps boost according to some 
>people on steam.
>
>source: http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?p=5075492
>
>Hairworks is the main performance killer for me, but apparently I have a 
>low end rig, so ymmv.
>
>Werner
>


I'm getting a solid 60fps no matter what I do (I would be shocked if I
didn't, given the quality of the graphics and my GPU setup), but that
60fps cap is part of my problem with the game.  I know the RPG
community is typically not a stickler for framerates, but once you've
gotten accustomed to these games running in the 120-144fps range,
going back to 60 really feels like a downgrade.  There are some game
engines that can still feel reasonably good at 60fps, but to me
there's just nothing about this engine that feels or looks good.
Detailed lines look aliased even when AA is on.  With everything
maxed, it's just an underwhelming game, visually.  No graphics aren't
everything, but in this day and age with the development tools
available, there is no reason to lower the graphic bar, and if it must
be done, then to charge the full price for a AAA title seems criminal
to me.

Then there is the stuttery feel of the graphics.  I don't know if it's
frame variance or what.  Perhaps even an SLI issue.  But, how long
have they been working on this game?  And it's not like they are
producing lots of important titles, this is their flagship product.

It feels a step back from Witcher 2 to me.  I haven't loaded them up
side by side to really compare, but at the time Witcher 2 came out, I
was enjoying it.  Every time I load this up, something about it just
makes me want to exit to main menu.

On Thu, 21 May 2015 14:00:01 -0400, DMP <D...@nodomain.com> wrote:

>On 5/20/2015 6:32 AM, Werner Punz wrote:
>> Hi I was just asking, because I have started to play the game yesterday
>> and I like it a lot.
>>
>> It even plays nicely on my low end rig (NVidia 660). Even on low
>> settings the game looks really good. (I have to play with the settings
>> further today, according to a friend of mine with a rather similar rig,
>> you can raise some of the settings to high without impact, the hair
>> however needs to be turned off that is a frame rate killer on low to mid
>> range cards)
>>
>> I have played for two hours yesterday and I am still in the starting
>> village doing sidequests. From what I could notice is that even the
>> sidequests seem to vary a lot and seem to be hand scripted.
>>
>> The game is really huge, btw.
>>
>> The only downside so far I noticed is, there are lots of NPCs you cannot
>> talk to they just mumble 1-2 sentences, however that is to be expected I
>> guess. And yes the in game fonts could be bigger.
>>
>> Werner
>>
>>
>>
>>
>I've gotten to the first village as well. My problem is that I'm easily 
>distracted by stuff/quests in the environment.
>
>I haven't decided yet on kb/mouse or controller. I think the controller 
>is tougher on my RSI'd thumbs.
>
>I enjoyed the interface on the 1st Witcher better; the fonts don't 
>bother me and FWIW patch 1.03 out earlier today seems to have helped 
>some players a good deal. Right at the moment I'm not as enamored with 
>the game as I thought I'd be. I don't know how to describe it, but the 
>whole thing seems "clunky" to me. I haven't given it much of a chance tho'
>
>d.

Yes, there's a clunkiness to it that's hard to describe.  Just feels
unpolished, half-baked, and over sold as a AAA title.

On Thu, 21 May 2015 16:25:56 -0400, Rin Stowleigh
<rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 21 May 2015 14:00:01 -0400, DMP <D...@nodomain.com> wrote:
>
>>On 5/20/2015 6:32 AM, Werner Punz wrote:
>>> Hi I was just asking, because I have started to play the game yesterday
>>> and I like it a lot.
>>>
>>> It even plays nicely on my low end rig (NVidia 660). Even on low
>>> settings the game looks really good. (I have to play with the settings
>>> further today, according to a friend of mine with a rather similar rig,
>>> you can raise some of the settings to high without impact, the hair
>>> however needs to be turned off that is a frame rate killer on low to mid
>>> range cards)
>>>
>>> I have played for two hours yesterday and I am still in the starting
>>> village doing sidequests. From what I could notice is that even the
>>> sidequests seem to vary a lot and seem to be hand scripted.
>>>
>>> The game is really huge, btw.
>>>
>>> The only downside so far I noticed is, there are lots of NPCs you cannot
>>> talk to they just mumble 1-2 sentences, however that is to be expected I
>>> guess. And yes the in game fonts could be bigger.
>>>
>>> Werner
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>I've gotten to the first village as well. My problem is that I'm easily 
>>distracted by stuff/quests in the environment.
>>
>>I haven't decided yet on kb/mouse or controller. I think the controller 
>>is tougher on my RSI'd thumbs.
>>
>>I enjoyed the interface on the 1st Witcher better; the fonts don't 
>>bother me and FWIW patch 1.03 out earlier today seems to have helped 
>>some players a good deal. Right at the moment I'm not as enamored with 
>>the game as I thought I'd be. I don't know how to describe it, but the 
>>whole thing seems "clunky" to me. I haven't given it much of a chance tho'
>>
>>d.
>
>Yes, there's a clunkiness to it that's hard to describe.  Just feels
>unpolished, half-baked, and over sold as a AAA title.

Yeah, some gripes of mine include:

- I wish I could zoom in a bit closer to Garret as well. It doesn't
have to be first-person view but the camera is a bit further out than
I'd like. 

- The range at which you can interact with items is pretty small and
finicky too. You have to be practically on top of an item before you
can use item and even then it sometimes just doesn't work.

- There are hot-keys to take you into specific menu-screens (I for
inventory, M for Map) but nothing that takes you directly back to the
game; you have to press ESC several times to go through subsidiary
menu screens before you are back in the action. 

- Can't just press ESC to quit a conversation.

- While walking down the street NPCs are barking information at me all
the time, but I have a hard-time telling who is saying it and
following those conversations. None of this information (so far) is
vital but these longer discourses really should have been put into
proper conversation trees that can be initiated by the player rather
than just hope they stumble on them. 

- Still hate the combat. Its too much dependent on user-reflexes,
especially the parrying/riposte. And all the leaping and tumbling
looks ridiculous, like bad wire-fu.

- Don't like the "witcher senses" for much the same reason I didn't
like the Detective Mode of the Batman games: it's too useful not to
have on all the time but using it ruins the visuals (instead of a
colorful and well-rendered world you wander around in a wobbly grey
mess). And I hate having to hold down a button constantly to use it.


Probably could think up some more if I put  my mind to it, but I think
you get the idea. Yeah, all of these are fairly minor issues but they
add up and each one makes the user experience just slightly less
pleasant.  Its definitely a game that could have used much more
iteration in its game design, but I guess CD-ProjectRed doesn't have
the resources for that sort of thing; its very time-consuming.

Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> looked up from reading the entrails of the
porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>Am 21.05.15 um 15:52 schrieb Spalls Hurgenson:
>ers who mumble a few sentences.
>>
>> I know, and it annoys me. I didn't like that limitation in the first
>> two games either. I want to be able to pick up and move everything.
>> Plus it seems sort of a waste to render all that stuff if it serves no
>> purpose.
>>
>Mhh if you like fully interactive worlds then go for Ultima 7, the 
>Underworlds, Arx Fatalis or Divinity Original sin. No game comes even 
>remotely close to those interactivity wise.

Gothic had quite a bit as well as I recall.
Only played the first one - tried the second, couldn't get into it.

Xocyll
-- 
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of 
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably, 
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So 
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr 

Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>On Thu, 21 May 2015 19:53:47 +1200, Peter Huebner
><p.w.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <i4mplatvib8arliqp...@4ax.com>, Xoc...@gmx.com 
>>says...
>>> 
>>> Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> looked up from reading the
>>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
>>> say:
>>> 
>>> >Seems to be the work of some idiot pollocks to me.
>>> 
>>> Were you referring to the American abstract expressionist painter, or
>>> the fish?
>>> 
>>> You used the plural, so either both, or just the fish.
>>> 
>>> Now why you think a dead painter and/or some fish were responsible is
>>> the question.
>>> 
>>> Xocyll
>>
>>
>>I rather like Pollock's paintings (not at all familiar with the fish).
>>However, Kandinsky's "Composition VIII" is still top of the pops for me. 
>>:-)
>>
>>Anyway, your .sig seems  strangely appropriate for some bigot making a 
>>fool of itself by not even knowing how to spell ethnic slander (what's 
>>new?). 
>>
>>Heh,   -P.
>
>My typos and misspellings are part of my "digital signature" :).  If
>you see a sizable post claiming to originate from my keyboard that
>doesn't have at least one, please report the imposter to the
>authorities.
>
>So you know, urban dictionary (a most appropriate source for terms
>like this) recognizes my spelling as correct.  So you're wrong there.
>
>http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=pollock

Wow, using urban dictionary, a site like Wikipedia where everyone and
their dog can add their own content, whether it's true or not.

Urban dictionary is full of misspelled words entered by teens (and
probably tweens) who don't know how to actually spell them properly.

>Polack/Pollock/Polok etc can all be used interchangeably at the whim
>of the wielder.

>But, you should know it's not really an "ethnic slander".  At least
>here in the US it is somewhat of a dated slang word (which in itself
>makes it funny) to refer to a general git/dolt whatever that is
>independent of their nationality, and that is the context with which I
>was using it.

It's in the Racial Slur Database and it's not spelled the way you
spelled it.

http://www.rsdb.org/full

Xocyll
-- 
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of 
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably, 
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So 
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr 

Am 22.05.15 um 17:00 schrieb Xocyll:
>> Mhh if you like fully interactive worlds then go for Ultima 7, the
>> >Underworlds, Arx Fatalis or Divinity Original sin. No game comes even
>> >remotely close to those interactivity wise.
> Gothic had quite a bit as well as I recall.
> Only played the first one - tried the second, couldn't get into it.

Actually Gothic 2 was the pinnacle of the series.
And yes you are right the Gothics and Risen Games by Piranha Byte had a 
lot of interactivity. I simply forgot about those in my list :-)


Werner

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollock

In the UK our traditionally favourite fish for eating e.g. 'fish & chips'
is Cod or Haddock.
I believe in the USA people just refer to 'whitefish' without much 
distinction as
to the type.

But the horrible depletion & low stocks of Cod in the Atlantic meant
Pollock has been come the widely used alternative - particularly in
manufactured meal type products like Fish Fingers .
Apparently McDonalds fish burger things are made of Pollock.
But UK Fish n Chip shops don't use it - has to be Cod or Haddock.

Apparently there are a number of different sub species .
We often see 'Alaska Pollock' on packet ingredients.
There are a number of different spellings for these fishes.

"Pollock and other species of gadids are plagued by parasites, one of which 
is the cod worm, Lernaeocera branchialis, a copepod crustacean.
At its final stage, the female parasite, with fertilized eggs, clings to the 
gills of the fish and metamorphoses into
a plump, sinusoidal, wormlike body, with a coiled mass of egg strings at the 
rear." (Wikipedia)
Good Monster for a Comp. Game !
@@@

I'm a fan of the painter Jackson Pollock.
Takes a lot of nerve to just chuck paint around - & vast amounts of practice 
to get some meaning into it.

(\__/)
(='.'=) This is Bunny. Copy and paste Bunny into your
(")_(") signature to help him gain world domination.

On Sat, 23 May 2015 01:46:58 +0100, "Trimble Bracegirdle"
<no-spam@never.spam> wrote:

>"Pollock and other species of gadids are plagued by parasites, one of which 
>is the cod worm, Lernaeocera branchialis, a copepod crustacean.
>At its final stage, the female parasite, with fertilized eggs, clings to the 
>gills of the fish and metamorphoses into
>a plump, sinusoidal, wormlike body, with a coiled mass of egg strings at the 
>rear." (Wikipedia)

Sounds about like the folks that created this turd of a game to me.
Terd is also an acceptable spelling in modern slang.

On Fri, 22 May 2015 09:26:16 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 21 May 2015 16:25:56 -0400, Rin Stowleigh
><rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 21 May 2015 14:00:01 -0400, DMP <D...@nodomain.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 5/20/2015 6:32 AM, Werner Punz wrote:
>>>> Hi I was just asking, because I have started to play the game yesterday
>>>> and I like it a lot.
>>>>
>>>> It even plays nicely on my low end rig (NVidia 660). Even on low
>>>> settings the game looks really good. (I have to play with the settings
>>>> further today, according to a friend of mine with a rather similar rig,
>>>> you can raise some of the settings to high without impact, the hair
>>>> however needs to be turned off that is a frame rate killer on low to mid
>>>> range cards)
>>>>
>>>> I have played for two hours yesterday and I am still in the starting
>>>> village doing sidequests. From what I could notice is that even the
>>>> sidequests seem to vary a lot and seem to be hand scripted.
>>>>
>>>> The game is really huge, btw.
>>>>
>>>> The only downside so far I noticed is, there are lots of NPCs you cannot
>>>> talk to they just mumble 1-2 sentences, however that is to be expected I
>>>> guess. And yes the in game fonts could be bigger.
>>>>
>>>> Werner
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I've gotten to the first village as well. My problem is that I'm easily 
>>>distracted by stuff/quests in the environment.
>>>
>>>I haven't decided yet on kb/mouse or controller. I think the controller 
>>>is tougher on my RSI'd thumbs.
>>>
>>>I enjoyed the interface on the 1st Witcher better; the fonts don't 
>>>bother me and FWIW patch 1.03 out earlier today seems to have helped 
>>>some players a good deal. Right at the moment I'm not as enamored with 
>>>the game as I thought I'd be. I don't know how to describe it, but the 
>>>whole thing seems "clunky" to me. I haven't given it much of a chance tho'
>>>
>>>d.
>>
>>Yes, there's a clunkiness to it that's hard to describe.  Just feels
>>unpolished, half-baked, and over sold as a AAA title.
>
>Yeah, some gripes of mine include:
>
>- I wish I could zoom in a bit closer to Garret as well. It doesn't
>have to be first-person view but the camera is a bit further out than
>I'd like. 
>
>- The range at which you can interact with items is pretty small and
>finicky too. You have to be practically on top of an item before you
>can use item and even then it sometimes just doesn't work.
>
>- There are hot-keys to take you into specific menu-screens (I for
>inventory, M for Map) but nothing that takes you directly back to the
>game; you have to press ESC several times to go through subsidiary
>menu screens before you are back in the action. 
>
>- Can't just press ESC to quit a conversation.
>
>- While walking down the street NPCs are barking information at me all
>the time, but I have a hard-time telling who is saying it and
>following those conversations. None of this information (so far) is
>vital but these longer discourses really should have been put into
>proper conversation trees that can be initiated by the player rather
>than just hope they stumble on them. 
>
>- Still hate the combat. Its too much dependent on user-reflexes,
>especially the parrying/riposte. And all the leaping and tumbling
>looks ridiculous, like bad wire-fu.
>
>- Don't like the "witcher senses" for much the same reason I didn't
>like the Detective Mode of the Batman games: it's too useful not to
>have on all the time but using it ruins the visuals (instead of a
>colorful and well-rendered world you wander around in a wobbly grey
>mess). And I hate having to hold down a button constantly to use it.
>
>
>Probably could think up some more if I put  my mind to it, but I think
>you get the idea. Yeah, all of these are fairly minor issues but they
>add up and each one makes the user experience just slightly less
>pleasant.  Its definitely a game that could have used much more
>iteration in its game design, but I guess CD-ProjectRed doesn't have
>the resources for that sort of thing; its very time-consuming.
>

Per your post in the c.s.i.p.g.action, I wish I had just bought it on
Origin, where it would have been easy to get a refund.

I'm more interested in this game at the $20 level after they have the
bugs worked out.

Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> looked up from reading the entrails of the
porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>Am 22.05.15 um 17:00 schrieb Xocyll:
>>> Mhh if you like fully interactive worlds then go for Ultima 7, the
>>> >Underworlds, Arx Fatalis or Divinity Original sin. No game comes even
>>> >remotely close to those interactivity wise.
>> Gothic had quite a bit as well as I recall.
>> Only played the first one - tried the second, couldn't get into it.
>
>Actually Gothic 2 was the pinnacle of the series.
>And yes you are right the Gothics and Risen Games by Piranha Byte had a 
>lot of interactivity. I simply forgot about those in my list :-)


It's been a while since I played either, but I think Gothic might have
edged out Ultima Underworld in the number of interactions.

But UU had weapons degradation, spell crafting (well rune arranging) and
some other things Gothic didn't as I recall.

I guess when the new crop of gamers are diagnosed ADHD and/or ADD and
love "speed runs" developers feel there isn't much point in adding all
this stuff, even in MMOS.  <Sigh>

IE ESO has armor wear (but no weapons wear,) but no matter your skill
you can't repair it, except with special 1-use kits of the appropriate
level.   A master blacksmith that crafted the armor in the first place
has to buy a kit to repair it, or pay some random shopkeeper to do it
(yeah cause it makes so much sense that a cook, woodworker, mage,
travelling merchant, whatever would be better at armor repair than the
person who crafted it in the first place.)

Xocyll
-- 
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of 
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably, 
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So 
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr 

"Trimble Bracegirdle" <no-spam@never.spam> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollock
>
>In the UK our traditionally favourite fish for eating e.g. 'fish & chips'
>is Cod or Haddock.
>I believe in the USA people just refer to 'whitefish' without much 
>distinction as
>to the type.
>
>But the horrible depletion & low stocks of Cod in the Atlantic meant
>Pollock has been come the widely used alternative - particularly in
>manufactured meal type products like Fish Fingers .
>Apparently McDonalds fish burger things are made of Pollock.
>But UK Fish n Chip shops don't use it - has to be Cod or Haddock.
>
>Apparently there are a number of different sub species .
>We often see 'Alaska Pollock' on packet ingredients.
>There are a number of different spellings for these fishes.
>
>"Pollock and other species of gadids are plagued by parasites, one of which 
>is the cod worm, Lernaeocera branchialis, a copepod crustacean.
>At its final stage, the female parasite, with fertilized eggs, clings to the 
>gills of the fish and metamorphoses into
>a plump, sinusoidal, wormlike body, with a coiled mass of egg strings at the 
>rear." (Wikipedia)
>Good Monster for a Comp. Game !
>@@@
>
>I'm a fan of the painter Jackson Pollock.
>Takes a lot of nerve to just chuck paint around - & vast amounts of practice 
>to get some meaning into it.

Unless you're doing "modern art" in which case you just literally throw
paint (or other substances) at a canvas then give it a pretentious
title, and the modern art snobs will convince themselves that they see
in the painting what the title indicates they should see.

Reminds me of the INXS, Suicide Blond story;
Apparently the guy they hired to do the video showed up and said he
loved the song and how he thought the song was a metaphor for the
deforestation of the Amazon basin or somesuch, when in fact it's just
about a girl who dyed her hair, as the band immediately told him.

He read meaning into it that it never had.

Xocyll
-- 
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of 
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably, 
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So 
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr 

On 5/23/2015 12:17 AM, Rin Stowleigh wrote:
> On Fri, 22 May 2015 09:26:16 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
> <spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 21 May 2015 16:25:56 -0400, Rin Stowleigh
>> <rstow...@nevrhadgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 21 May 2015 14:00:01 -0400, DMP <D...@nodomain.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/20/2015 6:32 AM, Werner Punz wrote:
>>>>> Hi I was just asking, because I have started to play the game yesterday
>>>>> and I like it a lot.
>>>>>
>>>>> It even plays nicely on my low end rig (NVidia 660). Even on low
>>>>> settings the game looks really good. (I have to play with the settings
>>>>> further today, according to a friend of mine with a rather similar rig,
>>>>> you can raise some of the settings to high without impact, the hair
>>>>> however needs to be turned off that is a frame rate killer on low to mid
>>>>> range cards)
>>>>>
>>>>> I have played for two hours yesterday and I am still in the starting
>>>>> village doing sidequests. From what I could notice is that even the
>>>>> sidequests seem to vary a lot and seem to be hand scripted.
>>>>>
>>>>> The game is really huge, btw.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only downside so far I noticed is, there are lots of NPCs you cannot
>>>>> talk to they just mumble 1-2 sentences, however that is to be expected I
>>>>> guess. And yes the in game fonts could be bigger.
>>>>>
>>>>> Werner
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I've gotten to the first village as well. My problem is that I'm easily
>>>> distracted by stuff/quests in the environment.
>>>>
>>>> I haven't decided yet on kb/mouse or controller. I think the controller
>>>> is tougher on my RSI'd thumbs.
>>>>
>>>> I enjoyed the interface on the 1st Witcher better; the fonts don't
>>>> bother me and FWIW patch 1.03 out earlier today seems to have helped
>>>> some players a good deal. Right at the moment I'm not as enamored with
>>>> the game as I thought I'd be. I don't know how to describe it, but the
>>>> whole thing seems "clunky" to me. I haven't given it much of a chance tho'
>>>>
>>>> d.
>>>
>>> Yes, there's a clunkiness to it that's hard to describe.  Just feels
>>> unpolished, half-baked, and over sold as a AAA title.
>>
>> Yeah, some gripes of mine include:
>>
>> - I wish I could zoom in a bit closer to Garret as well. It doesn't
>> have to be first-person view but the camera is a bit further out than
>> I'd like.
>>
>> - The range at which you can interact with items is pretty small and
>> finicky too. You have to be practically on top of an item before you
>> can use item and even then it sometimes just doesn't work.
>>
>> - There are hot-keys to take you into specific menu-screens (I for
>> inventory, M for Map) but nothing that takes you directly back to the
>> game; you have to press ESC several times to go through subsidiary
>> menu screens before you are back in the action.
>>
>> - Can't just press ESC to quit a conversation.
>>
>> - While walking down the street NPCs are barking information at me all
>> the time, but I have a hard-time telling who is saying it and
>> following those conversations. None of this information (so far) is
>> vital but these longer discourses really should have been put into
>> proper conversation trees that can be initiated by the player rather
>> than just hope they stumble on them.
>>
>> - Still hate the combat. Its too much dependent on user-reflexes,
>> especially the parrying/riposte. And all the leaping and tumbling
>> looks ridiculous, like bad wire-fu.
>>
>> - Don't like the "witcher senses" for much the same reason I didn't
>> like the Detective Mode of the Batman games: it's too useful not to
>> have on all the time but using it ruins the visuals (instead of a
>> colorful and well-rendered world you wander around in a wobbly grey
>> mess). And I hate having to hold down a button constantly to use it.
>>
>>
>> Probably could think up some more if I put  my mind to it, but I think
>> you get the idea. Yeah, all of these are fairly minor issues but they
>> add up and each one makes the user experience just slightly less
>> pleasant.  Its definitely a game that could have used much more
>> iteration in its game design, but I guess CD-ProjectRed doesn't have
>> the resources for that sort of thing; its very time-consuming.
>>
>
> Per your post in the c.s.i.p.g.action, I wish I had just bought it on
> Origin, where it would have been easy to get a refund.
>
> I'm more interested in this game at the $20 level after they have the
> bugs worked out.
>

I got to that first village killed the wolves and heard that incessant 
crying and screaming in the background; you know one or two cries okay, 
I got the message, but...it was like the fingernails on the chalkboard. 
I should have just gone on to whack them all.

I don't like the combat, don't like the way the Witcher senses mode 
works and while there's wind in the trees, they all sway 
alike-distracting. Maybe it's too much to have the trees swirl around 
unevenly. I would rather the folks not an integral part of the game just 
go on their way rather than mumble in the background.

I am disappointed in this game. I liked the first one; hated the 2nd and 
think I might hate this one as well. I thought there might have been 
some hope when I saw the interface a bit more polished then the other 
titles in the series, but more cumbersome doesn't make up for it.

I'll try to slog my way a bit more-maybe there's hope.

D.

The Witcher 3.
The more I look at Videos & read reviews the less enthusiastic I feel re. 
this.
The combat looks very repetitive - just hack n slash away.
Overall poorer than 1 or 2, certainly less RPG.
Arguably this thread should be the 'action' group.

I'm mentally putting Witcher 3 in a list along side Two Worlds , Arcania - 
Gothic 4
& even Ravens Cry . That's not a compliment.
The complex character & stories of the Witcher World intrigue me
but perhaps to do it justice in a comp. game
it would need to be in An Adventure type design..
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")  mouse (Hack n Slash n Bash a Bit)

On Mon, 25 May 2015 22:14:29 +0100, "Trimble Bracegirdle"
<no-spam@never.spam> wrote:

>The Witcher 3.
>The more I look at Videos & read reviews the less enthusiastic I feel re. 
>this.
>The combat looks very repetitive - just hack n slash away.
>Overall poorer than 1 or 2, certainly less RPG.
>Arguably this thread should be the 'action' group.
>
>I'm mentally putting Witcher 3 in a list along side Two Worlds , Arcania - 
>Gothic 4
>& even Ravens Cry . That's not a compliment.
>The complex character & stories of the Witcher World intrigue me
>but perhaps to do it justice in a comp. game
>it would need to be in An Adventure type design..
>(\__/)
>(='.'=)
>(")_(")  mouse (Hack n Slash n Bash a Bit)

They released patch 1.04, and I have not loaded it up but reading
through the patch notes it look like the added the ability to map all
keys, which is one of my major beefs.

I'm still going to let them keep patching for a while until I even
bother to load it up again, I'm not going to be a free beta tester for
them and I doubt they can afford me by the hour.

In article <fhn0malo3cq4sd652...@4ax.com>, Xoc...@gmx.com 
says...
> 
> "Trimble Bracegirdle" <no-spam@never.spam> looked up from reading the
> entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
> say:
> 
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollock
> >
> >In the UK our traditionally favourite fish for eating e.g. 'fish & chips'
> >is Cod or Haddock.
> >I believe in the USA people just refer to 'whitefish' without much 
> >distinction as
> >to the type.
> >
> >But the horrible depletion & low stocks of Cod in the Atlantic meant
> >Pollock has been come the widely used alternative - particularly in
> >manufactured meal type products like Fish Fingers .
> >Apparently McDonalds fish burger things are made of Pollock.
> >But UK Fish n Chip shops don't use it - has to be Cod or Haddock.
> >
> >Apparently there are a number of different sub species .
> >We often see 'Alaska Pollock' on packet ingredients.
> >There are a number of different spellings for these fishes.
> >
> >"Pollock and other species of gadids are plagued by parasites, one of which 
> >is the cod worm, Lernaeocera branchialis, a copepod crustacean.
> >At its final stage, the female parasite, with fertilized eggs, clings to the 
> >gills of the fish and metamorphoses into
> >a plump, sinusoidal, wormlike body, with a coiled mass of egg strings at the 
> >rear." (Wikipedia)
> >Good Monster for a Comp. Game !
> >@@@
> >
> >I'm a fan of the painter Jackson Pollock.
> >Takes a lot of nerve to just chuck paint around - & vast amounts of practice 
> >to get some meaning into it.
> 
> Unless you're doing "modern art" in which case you just literally throw
> paint (or other substances) at a canvas then give it a pretentious
> title, and the modern art snobs will convince themselves that they see
> in the painting what the title indicates they should see.
> 
> Reminds me of the INXS, Suicide Blond story;
> Apparently the guy they hired to do the video showed up and said he
> loved the song and how he thought the song was a metaphor for the
> deforestation of the Amazon basin or somesuch, when in fact it's just
> about a girl who dyed her hair, as the band immediately told him.
> 
> He read meaning into it that it never had.
> 
> Xocyll

mmmh. The thing is - if you look at the whole body of work of, say, 
Kandinsky or Picasso, you will see that these guys had well mastered 
representative art; they moved beyond it (and not by throwing paint at a 
canvas, although I can in no way vouch for Pollock).

However, if I see some pretentious prat standing in front of a red 
canvas with a white circle and a black like on it, "reading meaning into 
it" then "pratt" is all I can think. Which doesn't mean that I can't 
still enjoy looking at it, if it's well done. I like Liechtenstein, 
Warhol, Rubens Toulouse Lautrec, Rembrandt and Edvard Munch too. Some 
stuff appeals to me, visually, some doesn't and that's the end of the 
story for me. Matter of taste. 

People trying to "read meaning" in to poetry totally destroyed my 
ability to put up with it .... The Lit Crit fraternity (and sorority) 
are the biggest bunch of verbose wankers I can think of, apart from 
Wittgenstein.

It's there to enjoy, enjoy it or not, but don't try to despoil it with 
comments like 'throw paint at a canvas' - in many cases that is just 
slander, and not warrented.

Peter Huebner <p.w.h...@gmail.com> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>In article <fhn0malo3cq4sd652...@4ax.com>, Xoc...@gmx.com 
>says...
>> 
>> "Trimble Bracegirdle" <no-spam@never.spam> looked up from reading the
>> entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
>> say:
>> 
>> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollock
>> >
>> >In the UK our traditionally favourite fish for eating e.g. 'fish & chips'
>> >is Cod or Haddock.
>> >I believe in the USA people just refer to 'whitefish' without much 
>> >distinction as
>> >to the type.
>> >
>> >But the horrible depletion & low stocks of Cod in the Atlantic meant
>> >Pollock has been come the widely used alternative - particularly in
>> >manufactured meal type products like Fish Fingers .
>> >Apparently McDonalds fish burger things are made of Pollock.
>> >But UK Fish n Chip shops don't use it - has to be Cod or Haddock.
>> >
>> >Apparently there are a number of different sub species .
>> >We often see 'Alaska Pollock' on packet ingredients.
>> >There are a number of different spellings for these fishes.
>> >
>> >"Pollock and other species of gadids are plagued by parasites, one of which 
>> >is the cod worm, Lernaeocera branchialis, a copepod crustacean.
>> >At its final stage, the female parasite, with fertilized eggs, clings to the 
>> >gills of the fish and metamorphoses into
>> >a plump, sinusoidal, wormlike body, with a coiled mass of egg strings at the 
>> >rear." (Wikipedia)
>> >Good Monster for a Comp. Game !
>> >@@@
>> >
>> >I'm a fan of the painter Jackson Pollock.
>> >Takes a lot of nerve to just chuck paint around - & vast amounts of practice 
>> >to get some meaning into it.
>> 
>> Unless you're doing "modern art" in which case you just literally throw
>> paint (or other substances) at a canvas then give it a pretentious
>> title, and the modern art snobs will convince themselves that they see
>> in the painting what the title indicates they should see.
>> 
>> Reminds me of the INXS, Suicide Blond story;
>> Apparently the guy they hired to do the video showed up and said he
>> loved the song and how he thought the song was a metaphor for the
>> deforestation of the Amazon basin or somesuch, when in fact it's just
>> about a girl who dyed her hair, as the band immediately told him.
>> 
>> He read meaning into it that it never had.
>> 
>> Xocyll
>
>mmmh. The thing is - if you look at the whole body of work of, say, 
>Kandinsky or Picasso, you will see that these guys had well mastered 
>representative art; they moved beyond it (and not by throwing paint at a 
>canvas, although I can in no way vouch for Pollock).
>
>However, if I see some pretentious prat standing in front of a red 
>canvas with a white circle and a black like on it, "reading meaning into 
>it" then "pratt" is all I can think. Which doesn't mean that I can't 
>still enjoy looking at it, if it's well done. I like Liechtenstein, 
>Warhol, Rubens Toulouse Lautrec, Rembrandt and Edvard Munch too. Some 
>stuff appeals to me, visually, some doesn't and that's the end of the 
>story for me. Matter of taste. 
>
>People trying to "read meaning" in to poetry totally destroyed my 
>ability to put up with it .... The Lit Crit fraternity (and sorority) 
>are the biggest bunch of verbose wankers I can think of, apart from 
>Wittgenstein.

I remember seeing the beginnings of that in high school English class,
dissecting plays and poems for deeper meaning, and I can only assume it
gets even worse in University.

Once you've gotten used to that kind of thing, you do it to everything,
seeing meanings that aren't there and never were, assuming that because
some very talented people use multiple layers of meaning that everyone
in the field does.

The kind of idiocy I'm talking about is like the 1990 purchase by the
National Gallery of Canada of "Voice of Fire" for 1.76 million dollars.
It's 3 blocks of color, 2 blue, one red, and while they say it would
sell for upwards of 30 million today (to some fucking moron) as far as
I'm concerned it's worth what it would take to duplicate (which would
likely be less than a grand.)

What exactly does it have to do with voice or fire?  Not a thing

If it could be done by a small child, it's not really art.
Far too much of "modern art" falls into that category.

>It's there to enjoy, enjoy it or not, but don't try to despoil it with 
>comments like 'throw paint at a canvas' - in many cases that is just 
>slander, and not warrented.

But in many cases it is most certainly warranted as the "artists" have
never done representational art because they can't, it's random mess
with a pretentious name (when they aren't using shit or meat or rotting
vegetables to be shocking.)

Xocyll
-- 
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of 
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably, 
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So 
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr 

>The Witcher 3.

    Well, I've just started W2, and it's pretty darned fantastic.  Just 
about every aspect is a clear improvement over W1:  The voice acting has 
been flawless; the graphics are drop-dead gorgeous -- I've installed an 
environmental texture mod, and find myself marveling at clothing and facial 
details, just as I did in ME1 with it's big MEUITM texture mod -- and the 
whole tone and look of the game has a seriousness and maturity about it that 
was lacking in W1.

The combat is quite a bit more complex and rich as well, with dodging and 
counterattacks emphasized, and the odd rhythm mechanics gone.  With this 
much improvement from the first game, I'll gladly jump into W3 after 
finishing the middle game.  I've bought into this gameworld completely by 
now, and implicitly trust CDPR to deliver a good experience.

rms

On Mon, 25 May 2015 22:14:29 +0100, "Trimble Bracegirdle"
<no-spam@never.spam> wrote:

>The Witcher 3.
>The more I look at Videos & read reviews the less enthusiastic I feel re. 
>this.
>The combat looks very repetitive - just hack n slash away.
Not quite... turn on the Witcher 3 Combat Tutorial (when you buy the
game....)
>Overall poorer than 1 or 2, certainly less RPG.
Really? More concentration on the story and the game-world's
inhabitants and a little less on the mechanics of ability trees makes
it less of an RPG? 
>Arguably this thread should be the 'action' group.
>
>I'm mentally putting Witcher 3 in a list along side Two Worlds , Arcania - 
>Gothic 4
>& even Ravens Cry . That's not a compliment.
>The complex character & stories of the Witcher World intrigue me
>but perhaps to do it justice in a comp. game
>it would need to be in An Adventure type design..
>(\__/)
>(='.'=)
>(")_(")  mouse (Hack n Slash n Bash a Bit)
>
>
>

Hmmm.... indeed..... 

Having read what you said, out of curiosity I logged in ~ 3 hours ago
into Steam and perused the user-comments on the game. Out of the 8000+
comments,  7912  were rated 'positive' and 791 'negative'.  I sampled
the first 50 or so of the 'positive' and 25 or so of the 'negative'.
Strange that the positive reviews truly raved about the game, its
scope and depth, its graphics goodness and its character development,
and most of the negative reviews raved about 'technical issues' or the
'combat system. or 'alchemy system' or... something else peripheral to
the game itself not being to their taste..... Seems to be a lack of
understanding that these latter are just the chosen tools of any
action RPG and may need some relearning, just as with say Elder
Scrolls thru Gothic 3 thru Witcher 1 -->2 --->3.
------------------------------------------------
I am about 20 hours into the Witcher 3 (PC), running all Patches up to
1.04 on a clean install.  No crashes, As a long-term single-player
action-RPG fan, for me Witcher 3 is, so far, the finest action-RPG
ever produced. A truly-huge game in a dynamic world with stellar
story-telling, significantly interesting and varied mini-quests,
nuanced decisions that deeply affect the plot outcome, deft character
portrayal, even minor characters reveal their opinions and feelings,
gorgeous graphics with microscopic attention to detail. Perfect choice
of voice actors in all encounters so far, with scripting and character
animation that almost matches some of the best live-actor movies.
Combat mechanics by far the best (and most intuitive for
action-gamers) of all The Witcher series. No problem with mouse and
default WASD, only a minor remap of the ALT key for me (Remap
available in 1.04). Immersive, immersive, immersive.....

Morrowind in its time held the action-RPG crown and even now 
with some of the best graphics mods is still a significant contender.
However, The Witcher 3 with its seamless action-engine (at least on
the PC) and the loving attention given to all aspects of its creation
has now seized that crown.

John Lewis

On Fri, 29 May 2015 20:19:32 GMT, john...@frontier.com (John Lewis)
wrote:

>On Mon, 25 May 2015 22:14:29 +0100, "Trimble Bracegirdle"
><no-spam@never.spam> wrote:
>
>>The Witcher 3.
>>The more I look at Videos & read reviews the less enthusiastic I feel re. 
>>this.
>>The combat looks very repetitive - just hack n slash away.
>Not quite... turn on the Witcher 3 Combat Tutorial (when you buy the
>game....)
>>Overall poorer than 1 or 2, certainly less RPG.
>Really? More concentration on the story and the game-world's
>inhabitants and a little less on the mechanics of ability trees makes
>it less of an RPG? 
>>Arguably this thread should be the 'action' group.
>>
>>I'm mentally putting Witcher 3 in a list along side Two Worlds , Arcania - 
>>Gothic 4
>>& even Ravens Cry . That's not a compliment.
>>The complex character & stories of the Witcher World intrigue me
>>but perhaps to do it justice in a comp. game
>>it would need to be in An Adventure type design..
>>(\__/)
>>(='.'=)
>>(")_(")  mouse (Hack n Slash n Bash a Bit)
>>
>>
>>
>
>Hmmm.... indeed..... 
>
>Having read what you said, out of curiosity I logged in ~ 3 hours ago
>into Steam and perused the user-comments on the game. Out of the 8000+
>comments,  7912  were rated 'positive' and 791 'negative'.  I sampled
>the first 50 or so of the 'positive' and 25 or so of the 'negative'.
>Strange that the positive reviews truly raved about the game, its
>scope and depth, its graphics goodness and its character development,
>and most of the negative reviews raved about 'technical issues' or the
>'combat system. or 'alchemy system' or... something else peripheral to
>the game itself not being to their taste..... Seems to be a lack of
>understanding that these latter are just the chosen tools of any
>action RPG and may need some relearning, just as with say Elder
>Scrolls thru Gothic 3 thru Witcher 1 -->2 --->3.
>------------------------------------------------
>I am about 20 hours into the Witcher 3 (PC), running all Patches up to
>1.04 on a clean install.  No crashes, As a long-term single-player
>action-RPG fan, for me Witcher 3 is, so far, the finest action-RPG
>ever produced. A truly-huge game in a dynamic world with stellar
>story-telling, significantly interesting and varied mini-quests,
>nuanced decisions that deeply affect the plot outcome, deft character
>portrayal, even minor characters reveal their opinions and feelings,
>gorgeous graphics with microscopic attention to detail. Perfect choice
>of voice actors in all encounters so far, with scripting and character
>animation that almost matches some of the best live-actor movies.
>Combat mechanics by far the best (and most intuitive for
>action-gamers) of all The Witcher series. No problem with mouse and
>default WASD, only a minor remap of the ALT key for me (Remap
>available in 1.04). Immersive, immersive, immersive.....
>
>Morrowind in its time held the action-RPG crown and even now 
>with some of the best graphics mods is still a significant contender.
>However, The Witcher 3 with its seamless action-engine (at least on
>the PC) and the loving attention given to all aspects of its creation
>has now seized that crown.
>
>John Lewis

The Witcher series always had a strong point with characters and
dialog.  I liked 1 and 2 because they didn't make me feel like a 12
year old D&D nerd when I played them, and like GTA 5 actually get a
laugh out of me at times.

I hope by the time I get around to trying it again, the technical
issues that matter to me have been worked out enough that I can enjoy
it.  For example, still present in version 1.04 is the audio problem.
The audio is lower than every other app, and using the audio control
on my keyboard doesn't work.  It is literally the only game I've ever
seen that was able to fuck up something as simple as the volume
control, and the only Windows app on my system that behaves that way.
The framerate is fine but movement still looks jerky.

This wasn't an issue with 1&2.  I think it says a lot that I really
liked 1&2 and had an immediate negative reaction to 3 at the current
price point. Clunky as others have said.  I hope they can fix it.

Glad you're liking it in the meantime.

John , I'm really pleased to read your optimistic view.
I want to like Witcher 3 & hope to find my pessimism wrong.
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")  mouse (Time For a Ham & Cream Cheese Roll)

On 5/29/2015 6:11 PM, Trimble Bracegirdle wrote:
> John , I'm really pleased to read your optimistic view.
> I want to like Witcher 3 & hope to find my pessimism wrong.
> (\__/)
> (='.'=)
> (")_(")  mouse (Time For a Ham & Cream Cheese Roll)
>


I'm going to give it another go this weekend and like you, am hoping I 
can get over my bad initial impression.

I don't particularly care for the combat or how Geralt has to be so 
close to items that are interactive. Other games use a specific key 
point out interactive items in the general area of the character. If 
there is a key assigned to this task, I don't know what it is other than 
"e" to pick the item up or open it, etc., Maybe if I get into the game 
more and become more immersed in the story, I'll feel better about this 
long awaited title.

D.

For those who have purchased The Witcher3, don't forget to add the
free 16 DLC package to your download list. New equipment and new
contracts. The first 4 DLC items are currently available..

John Lewis

On Sun, 31 May 2015 02:28:39 GMT, john...@frontier.com (John Lewis)
wrote:

>For those who have purchased The Witcher3, don't forget to add the
>free 16 DLC package to your download list. New equipment and new
>contracts. The first 4 DLC items are currently available..
>
>John Lewis

The only question is "why"?  

I read somewhere a speedy, minimalistic path through the game requires
25 hours and playing all sidequests will take hundreds of hours. Where
on earth would anyone with any sort of  life get time to play this
DLC?

Sorry but these nutso-long games don't make a lot of sense to me.  It
would be okay if the time consumed was actually playing, but it's
mostly cutscenes.  

Story-telling?  I don't want to be told a story, that's something
toddlers ask their mom to do.  I want to be interacting and making
things happen, playing not watching.

Dying Light I really enjoyed but the main campaign minus side quests
was just too damn time consuming.  GTA 5 also is longer than it needs
to be honestly, the one saving grace is that I've found it to be a
pretty good game for putting down for a few days, coming back to just
to do 2-3 missions, etc.  

The biggest difference is that GTA 5, for sixty bucks, gives you crazy
multiplayer options.  I had already spent something like 30 hours of
MP time on GTA before I even started the SP campaign (sadly that's
what you have to do with a new release because nobody will be playing
MP six months from now).

Seriously, does the following from the Dev's mean anything ?
Shirley 'They' must be joking?

"The game also features a dynamic beard growth system, in which the beard of 
the playable character Geralt grows as he travels between regions. According 
to the developer, the beard grows "in different states." However, this 
feature will no longer be available if the player has downloaded the free 
Beard and Hairstyle DLC."
@@@@@

'They' say there will be 2 BIG expansions to Witcher 3

"....the future release of two paid expansion packs for The Witcher 3: Wild 
Hunt, summing up to over 30 hours of content.
If you’re wondering how much they’ll cost, the expansion pass has already 
been made available on Steam and GOG.com, revealing the price. It’ll be 
$24.99 or €24.99for both expansions together.

Hearts of Stone and Blood and Wine will also be available separately for 
$9.99 and $19.99 respectively,"
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")  mouse (Has He Got A Sniper Rifle /Bow Thing ?)

On Wed, 20 May 2015 12:32:02 +0200, Werner Punz <we...@gmx.at> wrote:

>Hi I was just asking, because I have started to play the game yesterday 
>and I like it a lot.
>
>It even plays nicely on my low end rig (NVidia 660). Even on low 
>settings the game looks really good. (I have to play with the settings 
>further today, according to a friend of mine with a rather similar rig, 
>you can raise some of the settings to high without impact, the hair 
>however needs to be turned off that is a frame rate killer on low to mid 
>range cards)
>
>I have played for two hours yesterday and I am still in the starting 
>village doing sidequests. From what I could notice is that even the 
>sidequests seem to vary a lot and seem to be hand scripted.
>
>The game is really huge, btw.
>
>The only downside so far I noticed is, there are lots of NPCs you cannot 
>talk to they just mumble 1-2 sentences, however that is to be expected I 
>guess. And yes the in game fonts could be bigger.
>
>Werner
>
>
>

*-----

Hello everyone,

I bought W2 but I don't think I ever started it.  With all the maps
and manuals in the DVD box set (something you downloader people won't
get which baffles me why someone wouldn't want everything that comes
with a DVD version), I think I was intimidated by that.

But since W3 got a perfect score at GameSpot, and recently upgraded
just about everything in my PC, I was curious how it would play and
look on my "new" PC.  I am only in the early training tutorial part of
it but it looks fantastic and runs fine so far.

Okay - am I missing something with these games?  After all the work
that the developer has done with all the impressive goodies (reminds
me of what the Ultimate series from way back when did), why do I have
to go into W2 and W3 and manually write down all the keyboard
commands?  Why isn't there a keyboard layout chart on some nice
reference sheet?

Maybe there is one on one of the DVDs.

-pw

On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 22:54:34 -0600, PW
<emailad...@ifIremember.com> wrote:


>
>Hello everyone,
>
>I bought W2 but I don't think I ever started it.  With all the maps
>and manuals in the DVD box set (something you downloader people won't
>get which baffles me why someone wouldn't want everything that comes
>with a DVD version), I think I was intimidated by that.


Just a point of clarification: if you get the game from GOG, you /do/
get maps and manuals, albeit in digital format. Also the official game
guide, wallpapers, soundtrack, artbook, development art, "making of"
videos, papercraft figures, a comic book and god knows what else
they've added since last I looked. 

I used to be a big fan of hardcopy manuals but these days I prefer a
nice PDF I can drop onto my tablet. It has all the portability of a
hardcopy (read: I can take it to the can ;-) and it doesn't take up
room when I'm done. I've got BOXES of old manuals sitting in the
closet.


>Okay - am I missing something with these games?  After all the work
>that the developer has done with all the impressive goodies (reminds
>me of what the Ultimate series from way back when did), why do I have
>to go into W2 and W3 and manually write down all the keyboard
>commands?  Why isn't there a keyboard layout chart on some nice
>reference sheet?

Well, in Witcher 3 at least there is an in-game tutorial (press ESC
and chose it from the main menu). Or you could just go into options
and look at the key bindings.

But it's not as if W3 game requires you to memorize an extra-ordinary
number of keys: WASD, Q, E, R, F, <esc>, <shift>, <ctrl> and <space>
is really the extent of it and five of them (W,A,S,D,E,<esc>) have
almost exactly the same functionality as in any other game made in the
last ten years :-). 

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:10:43 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 22:54:34 -0600, PW
><emailad...@ifIremember.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Hello everyone,
>>
>>I bought W2 but I don't think I ever started it.  With all the maps
>>and manuals in the DVD box set (something you downloader people won't
>>get which baffles me why someone wouldn't want everything that comes
>>with a DVD version), I think I was intimidated by that.
>
>
>Just a point of clarification: if you get the game from GOG, you /do/
>get maps and manuals, albeit in digital format. Also the official game
>guide, wallpapers, soundtrack, artbook, development art, "making of"
>videos, papercraft figures, a comic book and god knows what else
>they've added since last I looked. 
>
>I used to be a big fan of hardcopy manuals but these days I prefer a
>nice PDF I can drop onto my tablet. It has all the portability of a
>hardcopy (read: I can take it to the can ;-) and it doesn't take up
>room when I'm done. I've got BOXES of old manuals sitting in the
>closet.
>
>
>>Okay - am I missing something with these games?  After all the work
>>that the developer has done with all the impressive goodies (reminds
>>me of what the Ultimate series from way back when did), why do I have
>>to go into W2 and W3 and manually write down all the keyboard
>>commands?  Why isn't there a keyboard layout chart on some nice
>>reference sheet?
>
>Well, in Witcher 3 at least there is an in-game tutorial (press ESC
>and chose it from the main menu). Or you could just go into options
>and look at the key bindings.
>
>But it's not as if W3 game requires you to memorize an extra-ordinary
>number of keys: WASD, Q, E, R, F, <esc>, <shift>, <ctrl> and <space>
>is really the extent of it and five of them (W,A,S,D,E,<esc>) have
>almost exactly the same functionality as in any other game made in the
>last ten years :-). 
>
*------

Hi Spalls,

I copied down all the key bindings listed in the game.  All 41 of
them.  Surely enough to warrant a sheet!

I like the tutorial, but since I bounce back between games and don't
stick with playing just one I will have trouble remembering the keys
and instructions.  

Don't drop your tablet in the toilet! :-)

Thanks,

-wp

On Wed, 10 Jun 2015 10:10:43 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 09 Jun 2015 22:54:34 -0600, PW
><emailad...@ifIremember.com> wrote:
>
>

>Just a point of clarification: if you get the game from GOG, you /do/
>get maps and manuals, albeit in digital format. Also the official game
>guide, wallpapers, soundtrack, artbook, development art, "making of"
>videos, papercraft figures, a comic book and god knows what else
>they've added since last I looked. 
>

Look Spalls, you'd be better off taking a printed manual into the loo
than an electronic device! :-)

So, call me naiive, but when the game installed from DVDs it also
installed something called GOG galaxy.  I think I had the option to
not install it but I don't know how else to update the game as it is
not Steam, Origin, Uplay,...

When I boot up the game there is a GOG.com interface so how is this
game affiliated with GOG.com?  Do I need this?  I cannot continue
using the Galaxy thing unless I have a GOG.com code.  What the heck is
that and why do I need one?  What does it do.  PITFA!  How do I get
upgrades to the game?  Will adding it to Steam work?

By the way, I'd rather have a nice map, etc.. in color than having to
waste ink on my black and white laser printer and have it on 8 1/2" x
11" sheets of paper!

Thanks again,

-pw

On Thu, 21 May 2015 01:11:26 +0100, "Trimble Bracegirdle"
<no-spam@never.spam> wrote:

>Reviews are good but say graphics need tweaking
>& PC version really needs a Gamepad Controller
>I have mixed feelings re. the 1 & 2 Witcher  games.
>I am hoping on this W3 but not until a few patches.
>
>The attraction of the Witcher's is complex story & characters.
>I really like that idea but wonder if the demands of Video games for action
>& hunt around puzzles contradicts the story flow so the player really can't 
>concentrate
>on both.
>@@@mouse@@@ 

*----

I really need to go back and read GameSpot's review and why they gave
it a perfect "Essential" score.  One of the reasons I bought the game,
along with the previews of the graphics although I do not have an HD
monitor.

-pw