I don't think you understood me. Any argument you want to make against The Witcher 2's standing is redundant and ultimately moot. It provides a basic game option that no other game has. It is a universally applicable setting that you do not need to enable through CCC or NVCP. It's more complex than a basic multisample and significantly changes the appearance of the game. It's very clearly how the game was intended to be played, if in fact any hardware could play it reasonably with that setting enabled.
If you want to make a caveat about The Witcher 2's ubersampling, then by the same token Crysis should be stricken from every fps test because it is dated and significantly less efficient than Battlefield 3, inflating its standing and suggesting through its artificial bottleneck that it somehow renders superior polygons and pixels to more modern equally impressive games. Since no one is in a rush to do this (and in fact most people wanted to test fully modded versions of Crysis and Crysis 2 to sate their ego's attachment to the game), hopefully we can abandon any urge to put an asterisk next to The Witcher 2. It doesn't even need to be modded to take a dump on a system, and the same might be said for other games if they also had ubersampling, but they don't. Their development studios didn't bother or think to add it to the games.
To quickly counter your measure specifically, ubersampling is not the only layer of anti-aliasing in The Witcher 2. It does not supplant standard anti-aliasing, and the game itself is subject to all of the normal circumstances surrounding regular anti-aliasing, in addition to the complex supersample.