One thing I would like to add is that I'm not against these epic looking locations with mountainous landscapes in the background being here and there in the world of The Witcher. I just don't want them to be EVERYWHERE which is the case with The Witcher 2. If it's on every corner it loses the WOW effect (it's sort of like with the Fast and Furious movies which have to go more over the top with every new movie and it's not even about street racing and car tuning anymore which was the most interesting thing about those movies). It just doesn't seem very realistic, it's generic and reminds me of every other fantasy world. There are definitely places in the world of The Witcher where there would be epic mountains in the background but it should be only in areas where there actually are mountains (and that's only in few places) and the rest of the world should be pretty ordinary.

As mixed as the Witcher 2 was from a general visual and tonal direction, I do appreciate how it tried to follow in the spirit of Sapkowski’s usage of multiple viewpoint characters and episodic storytelling. For me Witcher 1 will always be top, maybe hearts of stone as second, but Witcher 2 was a beautiful and passionate attempt to push boundaries in a stagnating RPG industry at the time. Thanks for your video, I’m excited to share it.

Ooooooodriiin!!! Where are yooooooouuuuuuuu?!

The armor aesthetic in tw2 is so good especially the witcher sets and sorceress clothing, i always mod them in the third game for my playthroughs

What I love about Witcher 2 is the political aspect of the game. The story writers handled the political mess, backstabbing and shady deals perfectly and brought the arrival of Nilfgaard in a very thoughtful and mature manner. To this very day, I still cannot believe how they butchered Radovid in The Witcher 3 - in the second game, he was a very cold and pragmatic ruler, and then they decided to make him a madman in the third one (maybe it was done to give some justification why someone would support Dijkstra to become the ruler of North?) Even though the atmosphere of the first game cannot be beaten, the storyline is the best out of all three games.

As a Pole i appreciate this grandiose scale of Witcher 2, assets and designs got THOSE 80s fantasy vibes, which first comic books got properly (WRAN RUINS!). All in all everything gives proper folk-medieval witcher vibes, even if it is more bombastic.

It's good to hear I'm not the only one who love the low fantasy look and historically based armor/cloting designs in the witcher games 😊.

Let us hope that CDPR after making Witcher 1 remake (and that remake will be good) they will make remake of Witcher 2 and fix that epic fantasy stuff.

I definitely saw the 2nd game as a downgrade to the first as well. While I do agree that the landscapes and music are the worst in the series, and not fitting -- I focused on other issues. It felt like a betrayal to see a console-focus in both the UI and gameplay, I never wanted to see a quick-time event in the witcher. I also felt like they retconned the first game to take the sequel in a totally different direction. For example, they really wanted Triss to be Geralt's primary love interest, not giving Shani a second thought. You could definitely feel a western influence. But like you've said, there's things to like about the game as well. It eventually grew on me, and it was a lot shorter than the first game, so I replayed it a bunch of times to see all the choices and permutations play out. Mods also helped make it more enjoyable lol

Petrus Apiarius is honoured to be mentioned in one of your great videos which I enjoy watching a lot. Keep up the great work, love your channel.

Would love to hear more opinion on the Hussite trilogy. Read them after the witcher series and very much enjoyed the more historical aspect with the small parts of fantasy

Honestly it was a bit more fantastical than the first one, but compared to skyrim it was kind of epic in a way to stay more unique... the Lavalette castle felt and looked much more like Dubrovnik and Zadar than anything etc. Flotsam's forest and the mega krakken was a bit more larger than life, but oak-swamps could be nice if toned back. In my opinion the witcher 2 used more "balkan" areas as their mountains are actualy even more epic than imaginable. But this is just my theory.

7:58 I've read Hussite Trilogy 4 or 5 times so far and I've never looked for any artistic visual representation of any of the scenes or characters. And I have to admit that this art is insanely on point, it's almost too good. I've never really thought there's a niche on the internet with fandom of the trilogy that crates such masterpieces. I'm gonna seek for more, thanks :)

TW2 would be my favorite in the series, if not for the difficulty spikes. I liked the characters and the story telling more than almost any other game, including TW3, which I liked a lot, but it wasn't on the same level in these aspects. TW1 was also good, but the combat in that game was just a bit too clunky to be enjoyed. It also had difficulty spikes.

I come from a bit of a different perspective, being one of those Western players the game was striving to appeal to. I played TW2 when it first launched, having played through The Witcher 1 at high speed the week before (GOG offered the first game for free if you preordered the second, which I did). I liked both, but for whatever reason the second game doesn't remain in my mind like the first one. But even with the more fantastical elements, the game feels a lot more grounded to me than its contemporaries like Dragon Age, Skyrim, etc. I think you did a great job pointing out the game does a good job keeping the common soldiers as a part of the story, characters that rarely receive any kind of spotlight in fantasy stories. The mountains are something I have to admit I didn't think about. I know Europe has the Alps and the Carpathians to base their mountains off of, but it's my impression that those aren't towering Himalaya type mountains. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on TW3, which as of writing I'm still working on completing Blood and Wine.

I was just happy that they change the combat system. And I agree 100% that armors are the best in WItcher 2.

Another interesting aspect of Witcher 2 is the story. It is not epic. You are not fighting evil incarnate, a demon invasion threatening the world or something. You are just trying to clear your name and investigate why the northern kings are being murdered.

I've played Witcher 2 for the first time half a year ago, after I've finished Witcher 3 and became a fan (I've yet to read the books) I was excited when I've played the siege of LaValette and loved the amours worn by the temerian soldiers and King Foltest's plot. But the game graphically didn't aged that well for me, and with a veeery few exceptions, old games (+10 years) usually turns me off. Reason why as soon as I've finished the game with Iorveth's timeline, I've uninstalled it and went right back at Witcher 3. I always liked the low-fantasy genre over the high-fantasy aesthetics, tbh I've never liked the LOTR amors from Gondor because they looked too clunky and exaggerated (even though there are way better examples) and also I dislike that everything medieval has to be adapted to Western Europe or Hollywood, rather than keep it unique identity (Looking at Netflix adaptations)

i had tough time with witcher 2, my computer couldnt handle it properly so it often crashed but it was doable, however i didnt like the lighting - especially in flotsam forest that just wasnt good. the biggest problem in witcher 2 is the character control - that is prob the worst in all witcher games, takes longer to react if i want geralt to move if i need to, even w1 was much better in the movement control.

I like the idea of combining fantastic elements with realistisch elements. So the fantastical geht's more efactive. And I like it realistisch because the Main reason I like fantasy is because I like history and how it was in the past.

I do agree with your points that the changes were made to make the game more "epic" and that, just like any other originally PC only game, putting it on consoles as well was a technical downgrade in those years, however I really liked W2. Something about the atmosphere was just right, I loved the Floatsam hinterland locations and Iorweth was a great character.

I see your point, and I partially agree. Dragons also appeared in the books, but it is left open if Geralt would be able to win a fight against them. Yen seemed more confident than Geralt himself though. But I think this fight makes sense for the game. The Kayran is a bit weird though, I don't think book-Geralt would stand a chance, although if he might be able to kill a dragon, you could argue that dragons are probably stronger than Kayrans (and this Kayran looked similar to how the Zeugl was described in the books, which Geralt killed). But yeah, making Geralt so overpowered is also a problem I still very much see in Witcher 3. But if I remember correctly, in Witcher 2 there are some choices that will inevitably lead to Geralt's death, and I absolutely love that (in Witcher 1, too I think, if you confront Azar early in Chapter 2 after finding out about his impersonation). I'm really sad nothing like that happens in the third game, it just makes a lot of sense and definitely manages to salvage the atmosphere of being not overpowered to a point, even if the fights are ridiculous. For example that contract in Velen where Geralt finds out it was the Scioa'tael attacking. When five elves point bow and arrow at you, you better do what they tell you to or die, I would've loved if that happened in the game. I also see your point about mountains being everywhere, it would make sense to maybe only have them in Kaedwen and not Temeria, though the few fan-made maps I saw of the Witcher world usually have a lot of mountains, with Mahakam for example being in the middle of the continent between Aedirn and Temeria and probably visible from very far away. And there's many more mountain ranges, the Dragon mountains in the North, the Blue mountains in the East, the Kestrel mountains between Kaedwen and Redania, the mountains around Toussaint (though that is very far away from Witcher 2, even South of Cintra I think). And weren't there some cliffs at least in Kerack as well? Still with all of that, Witcher 2 manages to stay more down-to-earth than other high fantasy games, even if it's probably the most epic one of the Witcher games. To think that the console edition was the reason for the huge trees and weird distance shots in Witcher 2 makes me kind of said, in that regard Witcher 2 was definitely a downgrade from Witcher 1 graphics. But where I really think that Witcher 2 shines (apart from the medieval armour, where I definitely agree with you) is the pacing of the story. It's the best paced story I ever saw in a video game, the timing of different happenings makes so much sense and you don't have the same problem as Witcher 3 for example, where you're very desperately searching for Ciri but somehow still have time for all the side quests and card games. And yeah, mage clothing is a big one that also kinda was lost in Witcher 3 unfortunately...

yeah i totally agree with the points you made, in my opinion the second game dosen´t even feel like a real open world game. I played every witcher game wild hunt even twice and i have more playtime in the first game then in the second

It's a bit unclear from the video but did you actually end up playing this game past the Keiran?

I get what you mean. I think CDPR wanted this game to succeed more in USA so they made Witcher 2 more vibrant, more colourful and more high fantasy-like to gain the attention of western gamers who like this style of fantasy and are more familiar with it. I don't know the sale numbers of Witcher 1 but I assume that it wasn't really popular outside Europe. Not only because of its clunkiness but mainly because of this depressing and gloomy world that we associate with Witcher but it's not the case with the western community. Witcher 2 wanted to satisfy Americans and that probably was a right choice as we look at it now, because their budget grew A LOT after Witcher 2 which made it possible to them to make Witcher 3 even a bigger, more complex game.

I completely agree, however, this realisation came to me with time. I have no issues with high fantasy, so at the beginning, I had no problems with the move towards this style in The Witcher 2. Only later I started to appreciate the more-to-ground Witcher 1, with I finished after the second game, actually. Having both experiences, there is something else I feel a little disappointed with Witcher 2, and this translates to Witcher 3 too. The combat became fully arcade, and I prefer the classic RPG solutions in RPG games. So, I want the hit chance to be dependent on the PC stats, and not of my skill with how fast I can click the mouse or keyboard button. The Witcher 1 has that strange combo of stat-dependent hit chance and arcade but it was more to my liking.

They definitly tried something diffrent, and went a bit over the mark, but its a good game, solid and enjoyable

I always like tackling these type of videos even though I disagree for the most part. Great video though and these are important keeping the Witcher 2: Kino of Kings relevant! I don't really agree you with the soundtrack sounding generic and all that. It might do that for the first time, but once you start to digest it a bit more there are fantastical layers with instruments and vocals. Especially the piece "In Temeria" has to be my favorite with "Ladybug". Still mad at CDPR for not keeping Adam on board with them for 3. They even ordered a song from him which you can find with the "The Witcher Theme Song" name from platforms, really shows what they could've pulled off, some amazing orchestral and folkish blends. They went near bankrupt before they released Witcher 2 and took a risk with this game and it shows much passion they put into it and risky moves it took when compared to 3. Game shakes the foundations of the world Sapkowski created in a tasteful sense with great writing that challenges the man himself. Sure combat and interactability can be a bit off at times, but what the game represents for me it makes it a real gem. Amazing original story with great original characters and locations with more focus on politics in a videogame, just amazing.

I hated it mainly because of some stupid supersampling and ugly postprocessing (which is the reason why you can't see much far in not modded game) which were not possible to turn it off when it was released, so it had terrible FPS, fortunately mods solved that very fast and you was able to enjoy double or triple FPS then. And no, that blur in far distance is not there to improve FPS, it's exactly vice versa, it was just a stupid fashion and trend in games back in the day, I like things sharp, so I always turn these nonsenses off and when it's not possible in some game, I am really upset. I had the same problem with Dying Light when it was realeased in 2016, fortunately with later versions, they solved that and it was a great game then. Game itself was very different compared to Witcher 1, it was not open world RPG, more like Witcher action adventure. I don't remember much from W2, just naked Triss. 😀 BTW, Hussite Trilogy is pretty good, I would say that it's generally very similar to the Witcher, but you can see some development in how well Sapkowski can writte characters and build the world, it's sad that nobody knows this trilogy because it's pretty good.

First one! 😀

funny enough I finished lastnight the Witcher 1 (it was a blast) and while I loved the prologue (as I did all the years back when I first played the game but never finished cause I lost my save) the W3 precursor combat system threw me off, ye sure its more "free" and less "clunky" or whatever but it has almost zero style, it doesn't feel like you are a Witcher and fighting against more than 1 enemy feels like a chore and clunkeir than the first game. Upgrade and craftiing systems are ruined too, W3 is also barely any better, the first game had the best potion and upgrade system and I say so as someone who played W3 and 2 first, am not wearing any nostalgia glaces, am just not decieved by pretty graphics alone. In regards to the atmosphere, I see your point too.

Great video mate

Witcher 2 went main stream

Have you ever read sapkowski's hussite trilogy? I'm almost finished with the witcher series and am curious if the hussite is worth getting.

Good stuff, thanks man

Oooodrin!

It’s interesting to see that the setting and aesthetics are what turned you away. I played 3 before 2, and when playing 2 I didn’t even notice/care to notice any of the landscape differences. Truthfully, in any game, the environments are always unremarkable and leave no impression on me. What did leave an impression on me was the abysmally clunky gameplay of 2 compared to 3. No strafe, a horrific lock on system, and wishy washy feeling of movement and attacks made me drop it for a couple months once I was at the first enemy encounter. Ironically, this game had an arena mode because people enjoyed the gameplay so much. Also, very unrelated, but listening to SBH complain about “consolizing” the game just brought up memories of watching his videos and thinking he’s an exemplar of how baby-ish PC players are when any dev company understands they need to design for the other 50% of gamers on console.

The Witcher 3 is my favourite single player game so far and I hope Witcher 4 doesn't become woke.

Okey, this one was unexpected :D I feel the same yet, i stll dislike the Witcher 2. The beginning of the game was a mess (even the the breakout of the prison was fun), i didn't liked that memory-story telling thing in act1. The village, with forest was so-so. The part what i hated there was i felt closed in it. Like i only had some narrow paths and thats it. The dwarven-elvish mixed race city was okey, actually liked some parts but quests was... rushed? or felt somehow strange some point. (Sucubbus was good tho:D) And honestly, i hardly remember what was after it, i know there were some magic stuff, Triss trapped and the snake witcher, i liked the choice options but the whole game story line feel like different episodes entirerly. Like in Witcher 1, even if u had different act, u still felt u had some connection from 1 place to another, but in Witcher 2 it was odd. I also hated the first boss, but more of the difficulty reason. Also the changed to more generic fight system, i felt that i have less option with that. I hope that if CDPR going to remake-remaster the Witcher 1 , maybe even with the 2 (could also together in my view actually), they going to make them with considering your points.

Comment for statistics

Dvojku mám rád, hlavně první polovinu. Také combat ve dvojce mi sednul víc než ve trojce. Tam jsem ty údery mohl líp časovat zatímco ve trojce nevím kdy přesně udeřím po zmáčknutí tlačítka. Kotouly me ale sraly. Hrál jsem na low notebooku a pak na Xbox 360 a po pár letech i na PC v ultra nastavení. Podle mě je to i dnes zabiják grafik.

Still can't believe they gave Obama a copy 😂🤣