|
Do you have a screenshot? I never noticed a comet.
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 00:38 |
|
|
I don't, unfortunately, but if you have a savegame in chapter 2, just look up in the sky. It's also VERY big during the opening of chapter two during the bubble/red sky/wraith phase. I'll check google.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 18:31
|
|
|
chaosapiant posted:I don't, unfortunately, but if you have a savegame in chapter 2, just look up in the sky. It's also VERY big during the opening of chapter two during the bubble/red sky/wraith phase. I'll check google. It's not the Hunt, it's part of Sabrina's curse. If you take Roche's path Henselt tells you this outright. It's not an omen but a manifestation of the curse, like the wraiths.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 18:36
|
|
|
Chickenwalker posted:It's not the Hunt, it's part of Sabrina's curse. If you take Roche's path Henselt tells you this outright. It's not an omen but a manifestation of the curse, like the wraiths. I haven't played Roche's path since the game was new, but having googled this, it seems lots of people came to the same conclusion. However, I also saw some conflicting opinions on the Witcher 2 board. Is it possible the comet is actually both? As in, The Wild Hunt raced across the sky, appearing as a comet, at the moment Sabrina's curse manifested itself? The Wild Hunt DOES appear most often right before a large battle, a portent of war.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 18:45
|
|
|
I only remember the comet in Act 2. But it being an aspect of Sabrina's curse doesn't necessarily contradict the Wild Hunt hypothesis. She also predicted the coin conspiracy as part of the curse, but that began years before Act 2 and those people were acting of their own free will. It's kind of hard to separate cause and effect and coincidence with this thing. Hell, come to think of it, Sabrina's curse didn't even really trigger until King Henselt ill-advisedly spilled a holy man's blood all over an ominous looking standing stone covered in glyphs. It's not like it turned on the second he was on the field. Would it have occurred if Henselt hadn't done what he did? Could Henselt have done otherwise, or was that somehow part of the curse? Quite confusing. Not sure I believe this idea about the comet though. Just saying. EDIT: Meant to say I didn't remember the comet being in ACT THREE. I only recall seeing it in Act 2, but I did see it. The Sharmat fucked around with this message at 01:04 on Jan 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 18:57
|
|
|
Oh man, I never noticed a comet like that. And considering CD Red doesn't play loose with symbols and themes, I just hope it has something to do with the Star Called Wormwood.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2013 23:21
|
|
|
Chickenwalker posted:It's not the Hunt, it's part of Sabrina's curse. If you take Roche's path Henselt tells you this outright. It's not an omen but a manifestation of the curse, like the wraiths.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2013 00:09
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Oh man, I never noticed a comet like that. And considering CD Red doesn't play loose with symbols and themes, I just hope it has something to do with the Star Called Wormwood. Ravenfood posted:Henselt may be very, very wrong about this. Its not like he has the greatest occult sense in the game, since I think pretty much anyone in Witcherland could tell you that murdering a priest and splashing his blood against a massive glyph-riddled stone on an ancient battlefield that happens to be the site of an incredibly powerful magical summoning and a very powerful curse cast by a dying sorceress might not be the best idea. It just needed to be on the anniversary of the curse, or possibly with an orphanage nearby, to utterly cement the "this place is haunted as gently caress" idea. Basically, the curses may not be that specific, even when they work. And they can't just happen, they seem to need something else to work with. Some kind of spiritual pollution to make the person vulnerable/the circumstances right in the first place. Or I'm totally misunderstanding or misremembering things. One of the two.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2013 00:58
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:Basically, the curses may not be that specific, even when they work. And they can't just happen, they seem to need something else to work with. Some kind of spiritual pollution to make the person vulnerable/the circumstances right in the first place. I always interpreted it as simply: bad things will ultimately happen to bad people, and the Witcher universe has some of the worst people imaginable. You commit incest rape with your sister and bore a child? Yeah, the gods will make sure you get what's coming to you...
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2013 01:18
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:What is this? I think you're right, and it is both. Though I seem to recall the curse being the main cause. I'd have to reread that story though I think you are correct in that the incest may have made the curse possible. Wormwood is a comet/falling star that's a portent of the apocalypse in the bible. Dunno if he/she is referring to something else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2013 01:40
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:What is this? Unfortunately, Slavic mythology isn't quite as specifc as Northern / Germanic lore--- and consequently, it's difficult to create a widely understandable world based on this framework (As demonstrated by Sapkowski's post-Witcher unreciprocitated attempt to write about the Hussite revolution). But still, I feel that i there's something that feels signficant, then it actually IS significant.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2013 01:49
|
|
|
I think in the case of the Striga, it was a "spell" cast by Ostrit because he was a jealous lover of Foltest's sister Adda (the daughter is named after her; two Addas.) So, yea, the "curse" was a direct result of the incest, but not from the "gods" but simply from bad people trying to gently caress over other bad people. Destiny/Prophecy play a big role in the Witcher universe, but it's never a clear cut line. Such as Geralt getting Ciri. He pretty much straight up told Ciri's grandmother "I don't want the child," and then believed her to be dead, and STILL wound up with her.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2013 01:53
|
|
|
It was an interesting experience when I went on a walking tour of Romania just few weeks after finishing Witcher 1. Turns out that the concept of striga - as understood by Romanian villagers - has little to do with the western notion of vampire. It's more closely connected with the orhodox tradition which in turn finds its sources in the Greco-Roman canon, most significantly in the Arcadian proto-Greek religion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2013 02:00
|
|
|
Spite posted:I think you're right, and it is both. Though I seem to recall the curse being the main cause. I'd have to reread that story though I think you are correct in that the incest may have made the curse possible. Yeah, I seem to recall Geralt at some point suggesting the incest baby was a cause in that it drew the ire of someone else who subsequently cast the curse, not that it was in any way a direct cause.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
l33t b4c0n posted:You commit incest rape with your sister and bore a child? steinrokkan posted:Unfortunately, Slavic mythology isn't quite as specifc as Northern / Germanic lore--- and consequently, it's difficult to create a widely understandable world based on this framework (As demonstrated by Sapkowski's post-Witcher unreciprocitated attempt to write about the Hussite revolution). But still, I feel that i there's something that feels signficant, then it actually IS significant. steinrokkan posted:It was an interesting experience when I went on a walking tour of Romania just few weeks after finishing Witcher 1. Turns out that the concept of striga - as understood by Romanian villagers - has little to do with the western notion of vampire. It's more closely connected with the orhodox tradition which in turn finds its sources in the Greco-Roman canon, most significantly in the Arcadian proto-Greek religion. Chickenwalker posted:Yeah, I seem to recall Geralt at some point suggesting the incest baby was a cause in that it drew the ire of someone else who subsequently cast the curse, not that it was in any way a direct cause. You may be right now that you mention it. That kind of rings a bell.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
Is there any way to stop this game performing "first time setup" every single time I run it? Using the Steam version if that makes any difference.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2013 18:16
|
|
|
AXE COP posted:Is there any way to stop this game performing "first time setup" every single time I run it? Using the Steam version if that makes any difference. Go into the game's folder under Steam/steamapps/common and find the redist folder(if there is one) and delete everything in there. If there isn't then delete any vc or .net installers you find.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2013 18:54
|
|
|
Is this the comet you are looking for?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 01:03
|
|
|
Acquire Currency! posted:Is this the comet you are looking for? That's the one! It's also visible in Act II.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 01:23
|
|
|
chaosapiant posted:That's the one! It's also visible in Act II. I only noticed it by chance of accidentally flicking my mouse too far. This is at the start of the epilogue. Extremely sorry if that bit of text contains spoilers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 02:32
|
|
|
I never even noticed that. Do they ever mention it? If it's visible in both Act 2 and 3, then surely it can't be because of Sabrina's curse, can it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 02:38
|
|
|
Akong posted:I never even noticed that. Do they ever mention it? Well, I figured it was the harbinger of the Wild Hunt. Since the whole invasion thing is sort of what it beckons, right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
I love the idea of the Wild Hunt following you around, sort of like it did in the first game. Way creepy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 03:09
|
|
|
Akong posted:I love the idea of the Wild Hunt following you around, sort of like it did in the first game. Way creepy. Woah!! Really? I never noticed that particular tidbit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 04:02
|
|
|
Acquire Currency! posted:Woah!! Really? I never noticed that particular tidbit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2013 04:03
|
|
|
Wow. it is in Act 3. I'm positively certain that it doesn't appear until after Henselt triggers Sabrina's curse though. That lends a lot of weight to the theory.
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 06:39
|
|
|
I'm not sure, but I think the potions effects transfers to the soldiers you control in the Eternal Battle
|
|
#
?
Jan 29, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
Randomzx posted:I'm not sure, but I think the potions effects transfers to the soldiers you control in the Eternal Battle
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 09:34
|
|
|
Yeah, the potions are totally useless in the battle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 09:56
|
|
|
I hate that part of the game. It makes no sense. Why take away all of the player's abilities and make them go through some mind numbingly simple gauntlets? What does it accomplish?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 10:21
|
|
|
It forces you to put points into riposte?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 10:53
|
|
|
notZaar posted:I hate that part of the game. It makes no sense. Why take away all of the player's abilities and make them go through some mind numbingly simple gauntlets? What does it accomplish? (I've died so many times to the fire arrows) (At one point they glitched out and never fired. I happily made my way to the commander, only to discover he's glitched out as well. I must have spent 5 minutes poking all over the place hoping I won't have to go back to the start of the segment, like a Monty Python / Catch 22 sketch)
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
I didn't mean it was easy, it was just a really dumb. The worst part was the last one, when you were forced to dodge fireballs with basically zero warning. Once I got to the cutscene trigger and my character stopped moving as a fireball was coming down, so I died right after the cutscene ended >:^[
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 19:47
|
|
|
Fire arrows are probably the main reason why I will never attempt Insanity. I can get through purely skill-based parts like the Letho fight in one try now, but it's so easy to move at just the wrong second during the fire arrows part that I will always die at least a couple times there every time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2013 20:08
|
|
|
This is a few days old so maybe it's been posted elsewhere (there's no W3 thread, is there?) but CDP Red released an image from their new engine. It looks very Witcher-related. It's so small in size it's difficult to see how big an improvement it is over the last engine but it certainly looks nice.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 18:15
|
|
|
The worst thing about the Eternal Battle segment is that otherwise it's a really well done sequence. All those weird annoying design decisions make it really hard to appreciate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 22:19
|
|
|
The Sharmat posted:The worst thing about the Eternal Battle segment is that otherwise it's a really well done sequence. All those weird annoying design decisions make it really hard to appreciate. Did one of the recent patches change anything to the Eternal Battle segment? I was replaying it on hard mode today and I ran through it all in one go, no problem. I also noticed a lot more of my skills seemed to carry over, for example the hit multiple enemies for 50% damage skill from the sword skill-tree, can't remember that working before. I really stumbled a lot there on my first playthrough on normal (which was well over a year ago) but it went really smoothly this time, and yes it really is a pretty cool segment if you don't get bogged down.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 23:19
|
|
|
Autsj posted:Did one of the recent patches change anything to the Eternal Battle segment? I was replaying it on hard mode today and I ran through it all in one go, no problem. I also noticed a lot more of my skills seemed to carry over, for example the hit multiple enemies for 50% damage skill from the sword skill-tree, can't remember that working before. I really never found the eternal battle all that frustrating even without riposte, the exception to this would be playing it on Darkmode which was a pain in the rear end. I dont think the battle has really changed all that much since the game was first released. You carry over almost all of the sword tree skills the big thing is you cant roll.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
One of the recent patches seriously nerfed the damage that your opponents do during the sequence, meaning that it's now possible to beat it on Dark Mode on the first try instead of trying it literally 30 times and getting lucky once. Now if they'd just fix the "Geralt is evidently too stupid to have his weapon ready when the cutscene ends ANNNNNNDDDDD you just took 200 damage while drawing your sword" thing, Witcher 2 would be.. perfect.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2013 00:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 00:38 |
|
|
Witcher 1 was a huge jerk for that, but I though in 2 Geralt had his sword ready 90% of the time?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2013 00:33
|
|
