>>515569126I'm not surprised about them but am going to call a lot of anons redditors for thinking the never ending "but what if... get this... you got betrayed or could be bribed" quest design is additional depth over the last game. I haven't found a quest as mechanically deep as the waldasians or anything on par with say Godricks first quests when it comes to outcome within a bottle quest. The second game has a lot more "hey you, I need help killing some guys" quest chains that are enjoyable but they are structurally tried and true kill quests occasionally with some added bullshit. A lot of things follow a pretty predictable, almost overdesigned structure. When everything has a twist, final setback, or betrayal it loses any impact.
Main quest was just shit from the start, they need to fire every writer who worked on act 1 because they are just incompetent.
>everything Toth needed that was "damning" was in the letter he either had or Jan had from the raid, with signatures and seals. >If Toth didn't have the envoy letter then Jan did, which means he wouldn't have pretended to be lord of the castle when capon, the guy he would know he wrongly ambushed and as is Wenceslas supporter there to negotiate with the league of lords, showed up>You can't just "pretend" to be a nobleman, they would have arrested Hans >If he was who he was claiming to be and didn't have the protection of a messenger/negotiator then they'd just have captured and ransomed him>Otto has no reason to do any of the shit he does >Otto is retarded for not lynching Toth for getting dozens of title holding knights killed etc.
The end result of getting Jan and Henry to be frens and otto as an antagonist could have been done very easily by anyone, like in the first games team, who could map out a basic plot structure. Which is beyond their writing team apparently. Everyone new is bad, everyone old seems sidelined into the good side quests.
