The Witcher 3 Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[pakoito]

Are they trying to reason with the Internet?

 

[Rivmusique]

Brilliant, so there is actual drama over this. Any petitions/boycotts yet?

 

[Cazzeris]

Brilliant, so there is actual drama over this. Any petitions/boycotts yet?

Of course: http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitio...tions-of-the-witcher-3-equal-on-all-platforms

 

[Onholyservicebound]

Funny that a game company known for not screwing their fans over is going this route, and for xbox of all consoles.

 

[Rahdulan]

If they wanted partner incentive they should've gone all the way and have each platform's CE be different. Who knows, some people might buy all three.

 

[made]

This is a valuable lesson for CDP. The price for creating a good guys "we do it for the fans" image is that fans, being the entitled brats they are, will feel personally insulted and seek to destroy you if anything doesn't go their way.

 

[Nihiliste]

I can't believe there are actually people who are mad about not getting some cards with their game. Talk about a lack of perspective.

 

[cvv]

Not inclined to defend CDPR here, don't give a shit either way, really, but it's encouraging to see there are hundreds of thousands of people on the internet who know exactly how to run an independent development studio and how to produce and market a multiplatform game.

If only a 1/10 of them decided to get up from their sofa and put their vast knowledge and experience into practice maybe we would have hundreds of companies like CDPR. Only much, much better ofc.

 

[Nihiliste]

Years have passed and I'm still laughing my ass off at this

Spoiler

This is incredible.

 

[buzz]

Not inclined to defend CDPR here, don't give a shit either way, really, but it's encouraging to see there are hundreds of thousands of people on the internet who know exactly how to run an independent development studio and how to produce and market a multiplatform game.

Well, they could for one thing just not do that, you know. Nothing is more annoying than indies going "OH BUT WE HAD TO SELL OUR SOULS TO THE DEVIL". It's a faulty premise, on the range of "are you still beating your wife?". No ones asked for Witcher to be a multiplatform day 1 title. I mean, don't you know the expression "PC gaming master race" comes from a review of Witcher 1? It's a pretty PC-centric franchise and their continual need to cater to the console crowd has only brought them trouble.

 

[cvv]

Not inclined to defend CDPR here, don't give a shit either way, really, but it's encouraging to see there are hundreds of thousands of people on the internet who know exactly how to run an independent development studio and how to produce and market a multiplatform game.

Well, they could for one thing just not do that, you know. Nothing is more annoying than indies going "OH BUT WE HAD TO SELL OUR SOULS TO THE DEVIL". It's a faulty premise, on the range of "are you still beating your wife?". No ones asked for Witcher to be a multiplatform day 1 title. I mean, don't you know the expression "PC gaming master race" comes from a review of Witcher 1? It's a pretty PC-centric franchise and their continual need to cater to the console crowd has only brought them trouble.

That's exactly the reason I wrote what I wrote. I'm not a game dev. I don't have the first clue how this business works. Maybe CDPR got greedy and sold their souls to the devil. Or maybe going multiplatform is the only way to go if you have any ambition to level up your company and your games.

Not that greed and stupidity don't exist but from personall experience I know too well it's only natural for 20 years old angsty know-it-alls to shout about greed and selling out. But when you enter the real world and try to run your own business then it suddenly dawns on you that things are a tiny bit more complicated than living in your mom's basement, playing gaimz all day long and complain on reddit about corporations.

 

[buzz]

That's exactly the reason I wrote what I wrote. I'm not a game dev. I don't have the first clue how this business works. Maybe CDPR got greedy and sold their souls to the devil. Or maybe going multiplatform is the only way to go if you have any ambition to level up your company and your games.

Not that greed and stupidity don't exist but from personall experience I know too well it's only natural for 20 years old angsty know-it-alls to shout about greed and selling out. But when you enter the real world and try to run your own business then it suddenly dawns on you that things are a tiny bit more complicated than living in your mom's basement, playing gaimz all day long and complain on reddit about corporations.

I'm not disagreeing with you at all friend, see the other posts I've made recently. I'm just disagreeing with the idea that you have to do these sacrifices and expand your financial ambitions, but ALSO call yourself a "spirit of freedom and independence". It's a sign of hypocrisy and it just annoys me.

If they want to make bigger and bigger projects, flaunt them at E3 and go for the typical multiplatform marketing strategies, that's all fair and cool in my opinion. Just leave that hippie bullshit at home and embrace corporatism . Let the hippie, "we love gamers" talk to the guys who die by their words and principles. Original fans would be happy would be happy with a smaller PC project.

 

[NotAGolfer]

Those new Gamescom ingame scenes sure look jaw-droppingly beautiful. And I hope that RPS guy is wrong, because those camera pannings over the gameworld make it seem very open. I don't mind cutscene dialogues, doesn't influence my immershun the slightest. The more interesting dialogues with NPCs the better, at least that way noone has to make a mod with the same name like for Skyturd to make the NPCs feel life-like.

Very much looking forward to this, hopefully they will be able to merge open world with decent narrative, something Bethesda never got right. New Vegas is the only example I know where they managed to pull that off.

 

[Perkel]

heh looks like Xbox CE will be better than PC CE with game in the end on PC DRM in retail.

 

[Infinitron]

Those new Gamescom ingame scenes sure look jaw-droppingly beautiful. And I hope that RPS guy is wrong, because those camera pannings over the gameworld make it seem very open. I don't mind cutscene dialogues, doesn't influence my immershun the slightest. The more interesting dialogues with NPCs the better, at least that way noone has to make a mod with the same name like for Skyturd to make the NPCs feel life-like.

Very much looking forward to this, hopefully they will be able to merge open world with decent narrative, something Bethesda never got right. New Vegas is the only example I know where they managed to pull that off.

Reposting:

Their description is "open world, but not sandbox": http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...s-of-clarification-and-a-whiff-of-multiplayer

"We don't want to change the gameplay into the sandbox experience - that's not the plan."

Badowski reiterated: "We don't want to lose anything that we achieved in The Witcher's six years. Don't expect too many sandbox, mechanical solutions in The Witcher 3. It will be hand-crafted very precisely."

If this is what RPS are talking about then they'll likely remain disappointed. Witcher 2 with wide open maps is still not a simulationist sandbox-type experience. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

 

[Tytus]

I would understand if you were complaining about this with Witcher 1, but at this point you are just a cunt.

I see a angry potato.

I'm always angry due to the small size of my penis, but that doesn't change that you're retarded.

But that is just silly. You do for some reason claim that someone can't express an opinion about a game component just because that component was there in the previous installments of the game. Thats not how things work and the only thing retarded is you complaining about me expressing my opinion. But this go down to your lack of reading comprehension. You called what I said "a complaint" when it was a opinion about what I prefer in a game. And since you think I complained about your potato art you go around saying silly things.

I remember when people said they wanted Fallout 3 to be real-time, just like the first game. But since Fallout had been... oh wait.

Thank you for proving how retarded you are. Also stop comparing apples to oranges. We are not talking here about mechanics, perspective etc. We are talking about of the core features on which they decided since Witcher 1. You are playing an established character, a main character from the book series on which the game is based on. This will be true for the entirety of the Witcher trilogy. Thanks to this decision player can interact with the book characters as a long time friend/rival/enemy and not a blank slate they have get to know. So it's not like saying that they wanted Fallout 3 to be real-time. It's like saying "Damn Fallout 3 looks interesting but the post nuclear setting is putting me off. I wish the setting was different" This is called being a retard, because you are not able to recognize a core feature that for the time being can't be change because it would be a totally different game yet you whine about it like a faggot. And that is why future Witcher games will be completely different beasts.

You can blame my comments on me being a potato all you want, but at the end of the day you're still not very smart.

 

[made]

simulationist sandbox-type experience

What exactly does that mean in terms of contemporary games? Skyrim?

 

[Infinitron]

simulationist sandbox-type experience

What exactly does that mean in terms of contemporary games? Skyrim?

Something closer to Skyrim, at least. Of course Skyrim itself is hardly a sandbox compared to the Minecrafts and Dwarf Fortresses of the world.

 

[Tytus]

simulationist sandbox-type experience

What exactly does that mean in terms of contemporary games? Skyrim?

Something closer to Skyrim, at least. Of course Skyrim itself is hardly a sandbox compared to the Minecrafts and Dwarf Fortresses of the world.

Doesn't the mainstream have different definition of Sandbox? I encoutered different terms lurking on the net . For the popamole filthy casual games like Red Dead Redemption, GTA V and Skyrim are the pincale of sandbox gaming and they call games like Minecraft and Dwarf Fortress a world builer.

 

[buzz]

I would understand if you were complaining about this with Witcher 1, but at this point you are just a cunt.

I see a angry potato.

I'm always angry due to the small size of my penis, but that doesn't change that you're retarded.

But that is just silly. You do for some reason claim that someone can't express an opinion about a game component just because that component was there in the previous installments of the game. Thats not how things work and the only thing retarded is you complaining about me expressing my opinion. But this go down to your lack of reading comprehension. You called what I said "a complaint" when it was a opinion about what I prefer in a game. And since you think I complained about your potato art you go around saying silly things.

I remember when people said they wanted Fallout 3 to be real-time, just like the first game. But since Fallout had been... oh wait.

Thank you for proving how retarded you are. Also stop comparing apples to oranges. We are not talking here about mechanics, perspective etc. We are talking about of the core features on which they decided since Witcher 1. You are playing an established character, a main character from the book series on which the game is based on. This will be true for the entirety of the Witcher trilogy. Thanks to this decision player can interact with the book characters as a long time friend/rival/enemy and not a blank slate they have get to know. So it's not like saying that they wanted Fallout 3 to be real-time. It's like saying "Damn Fallout 3 looks interesting but the post nuclear setting is putting me off. I wish the setting was different" This is called being a retard, because you are not able to recognize a core feature that for the time being can't be change because it would be a totally different game yet you whine about it like a faggot. And that is why future Witcher games will be completely different beasts.

You can blame my comments on me being a potato all you want, but at the end of the day you're still not very smart.

Ehh, the Codex is not above making unreasonable, fanbase-raping demands as long as it fits their specific tastes. How many times did you see the "oh I wish this was turn-based" post whispered around this place?


But I don't think sequels need to necessarily fit into some random restrictions in order to function as sequels. The new Torment is the best example of a game totally different from the original minus the focus on good writing and some design decisions here and there. The character is not fixed (you can pick your gender, right?), the setting is totally different, the story has no relation to the one in P:T, the combat system is different and so on. Ofc with W3 it would be harder because the whole previous game ended on a cliffhanger but I wouldn't be that sad that I'm not playing as Geralt any longer, especially since he's mostly a blanc self-insert protagonist.

 

[made]

simulationist sandbox-type experience

What exactly does that mean in terms of contemporary games? Skyrim?

Something closer to Skyrim, at least. Of course Skyrim itself is hardly a sandbox compared to the Minecrafts and Dwarf Fortresses of the world.

Doesn't the mainstream have different definition of Sandbox? I encoutered different terms lurking on the net . For the popamole filthy casual games like Red Dead Redemption, GTA V and Skyrim are the pincale of sandbox gaming and they call games like Minecraft and Dwarf Fortress a world builer.

Yea figures. I'll be happy if it just plays like Gothic2 in terms of openness.

 

[Tytus]

I would understand if you were complaining about this with Witcher 1, but at this point you are just a cunt.

I see a angry potato.

I'm always angry due to the small size of my penis, but that doesn't change that you're retarded.

But that is just silly. You do for some reason claim that someone can't express an opinion about a game component just because that component was there in the previous installments of the game. Thats not how things work and the only thing retarded is you complaining about me expressing my opinion. But this go down to your lack of reading comprehension. You called what I said "a complaint" when it was a opinion about what I prefer in a game. And since you think I complained about your potato art you go around saying silly things.

I remember when people said they wanted Fallout 3 to be real-time, just like the first game. But since Fallout had been... oh wait.

Thank you for proving how retarded you are. Also stop comparing apples to oranges. We are not talking here about mechanics, perspective etc. We are talking about of the core features on which they decided since Witcher 1. You are playing an established character, a main character from the book series on which the game is based on. This will be true for the entirety of the Witcher trilogy. Thanks to this decision player can interact with the book characters as a long time friend/rival/enemy and not a blank slate they have get to know. So it's not like saying that they wanted Fallout 3 to be real-time. It's like saying "Damn Fallout 3 looks interesting but the post nuclear setting is putting me off. I wish the setting was different" This is called being a retard, because you are not able to recognize a core feature that for the time being can't be change because it would be a totally different game yet you whine about it like a faggot. And that is why future Witcher games will be completely different beasts.

You can blame my comments on me being a potato all you want, but at the end of the day you're still not very smart.

Ehh, the Codex is not above making unreasonable, fanbase-raping demands as long as it fits their specific tastes. How many times did you see the "oh I wish this was turn-based" post whispered around this place?


But I don't think sequels need to necessarily fit into some random restrictions in order to function as sequels. The new Torment is the best example of a game totally different from the original minus the focus on good writing and some design decisions here and there. The character is not fixed (you can pick your gender, right?), the setting is totally different, the story has no relation to the one in P:T, the combat system is different and so on. Ofc with W3 it would be harder because the whole previous game ended on a cliffhanger but I wouldn't be that sad that I'm not playing as Geralt any longer, especially since he's mostly a blanc self-insert protagonist.

Torment: Tides of Numenera is not a sequel to Planescape Torment. It's a spiritual succesor. It's like saying Fallout 1 was a sequel to Wasteland 1 or Project Eternity is a sequel to Icewind Dale 2. And no I don't think that game has to have some arbitraty restrictions to be considered a sequel. That is why I'm completely fine with Witcher 4 (or whatever will they call it) having a completely different protagonist. The thing is, the entire setting of the trilogy right now revolves around Wild Hunt, Geralt, Ciri etc. And to have the proper connections to the characters in the game you can't just remove Geralt for the third game. This a was a conscious decision of the developers to build the trilogy like that. So complaining about this late into the series when everything has been set up like this for the past two games is "silly". On the other hand when Witcher 4 comes out without this connection and it will have a set protagonist I will understand the complaints, because the series will ditch Geralt at that point.

 

[buzz]

You're making it sound like kris demanded at gunpoint for CD Projekt to obey his command and change the protagonist of W3.
The guy just said that it's a wasted potential than an open world RPG has a fixed character, that's all.

Of course, sequels that break the norm, stories that show different POVs, or where things are altered drastically in interesting ways can be done and have been done. Even in Witcher 2 you had that scene where you play as the king or something like that. One could for example make a Witcher 3 where you play as Ciri, and it will still be completely consistent with the setting and story of the trilogy. But then you couldn't be able to pander to the anti-SJW and 12 years old audience.

 

[Darth Slaughter]

Well, i don't give a shit about cards, but a cloth map on the xbone and not on PC? I actually don't give a damn for no cloth maps, but all the cloth maps I've ever heard about in gaming are assosciated with PC gaming, to the point of not including that on the pc version being nonsense. But I remember when GTA was originally a PC title, and look where are we now... making petitions for having the newest one on PC. FPSs? a console genre. In ten years? Cloth maps were aways a console trend...

About the fixed protagonist thing, well, there's lots of RPGs where you can role play yourself and create you dream character. Maybe some modder fix that. But it's like gothic, or even later ultima games. And having an option like "male" or "female" and change the name in a witcher game would be just as cosmetic as it is in mass effect, where you're aways a shepard.

 

[kris]

I would understand if you were complaining about this with Witcher 1, but at this point you are just a cunt.

I see a angry potato.

I'm always angry due to the small size of my penis, but that doesn't change that you're retarded.

But that is just silly. You do for some reason claim that someone can't express an opinion about a game component just because that component was there in the previous installments of the game. Thats not how things work and the only thing retarded is you complaining about me expressing my opinion. But this go down to your lack of reading comprehension. You called what I said "a complaint" when it was a opinion about what I prefer in a game. And since you think I complained about your potato art you go around saying silly things.

I remember when people said they wanted Fallout 3 to be real-time, just like the first game. But since Fallout had been... oh wait.

Thank you for proving how retarded you are. Also stop comparing apples to oranges. We are not talking here about mechanics, perspective etc. We are talking about of the core features on which they decided since Witcher 1. You are playing an established character, a main character from the book series on which the game is based on. This will be true for the entirety of the Witcher trilogy. Thanks to this decision player can interact with the book characters as a long time friend/rival/enemy and not a blank slate they have get to know. So it's not like saying that they wanted Fallout 3 to be real-time. It's like saying "Damn Fallout 3 looks interesting but the post nuclear setting is putting me off. I wish the setting was different" This is called being a retard, because you are not able to recognize a core feature that for the time being can't be change because it would be a totally different game yet you whine about it like a faggot. And that is why future Witcher games will be completely different beasts.

You can blame my comments on me being a potato all you want, but at the end of the day you're still not very smart.

I am sure this potato throwing is all really good but pointless. Regardless of how little you got and many times you will try to call me stupid. Stupidity is shown, not told.

You still don't get that I just said i prefer a game to not have a set protagonist. I don't even said I wanted them to change it. I said that was a preferance of me.
I like what I saw from the game, but prefer when games not have a set protagonist. do you get it?

but you could easily make a game with a player created protagonist and still have him interact with people like he know them since before. Its been done many times, but seldom to a big extent.