Game News The Witcher 2 Tidbits

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Tags: CD Projekt; Witcher 2, The

Firstly, there's an <a href="http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,745642/The-Witcher-2-New-engine-and-console-version-for-Assassins-of-Kings/News/">interview</a> with TW2 senior producer Tomek Gop regarding technical details.
<br>
<br>
<p style="margin-left:50px;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-top-color:#ffffff;padding:5px;border-right-color:#bbbbbb;border-left-color:#ffffff;border-bottom-color:#bbbbbb;"><b>Is the second part of The Witcher based on the same technology as the first part or do you reprogram or modify the engine or even write a new base technology from scratch?</b>
<br>
<br>
We definitely started from scratch. It was one of the first things our programmers sat to, right after releasing The Witcher. Our engine has been rewritten mostly due to specific, RPG related tool requirements that we've had. Of course there are things that inspired us from Aurora; ideas, solution approaches, but still - all of the code was written by us (excluding few middleware applications).
<br>
</p>
<br>
<br>
Secondly, IGN have a <a href="http://witchervault.ign.com/fullstory.php?id=57096">summary</a> of TW2 info from the polish gaming magazine CD-Action.
<br>
<br>
<p style="margin-left:50px;border-style:solid;border-width:1px;border-top-color:#ffffff;padding:5px;border-right-color:#bbbbbb;border-left-color:#ffffff;border-bottom-color:#bbbbbb;">For starters, CDA editors explain that plot-wise, the Witcher 2 is created by the same team that delivered the plot in the Witcher 1. This time, at the onset of the adventure, Geralt will have to choose between three major plot-lines (and only can play out one of them at a time to the end). Either he follows up on the political strifes that Temeria faces - including Baroness La Valette (in lore - Foltest's lover and confidante) uprising, the aftermath of the Order of the Flaming Rose rebellion, and the Kingslayer's attempts of separating "the heads crowned" from the rest of their bodies. Alternatively, Geralt can finally try to solve the mystery of his resurrection.
<br>
</p>
<br>
<br>
Three distinct plotlines? Sounds ambitious.
<br>
Spotted at: <A HREF="http://www.rpgwatch.com/#14856">RPGWatch</A>

 

[Grunker]

If it's hype, it borders on lying. If it's not, it sounds pretty sweet, but also like a weird design decision.

I honestly have no idea what to expect from this game right now.

 

[Admiral jimbob]

and only can play out one of them at a time to the end

I might be reading this wrong, but that sounds like it's just three linear branches that you can do in any order and you have to do them all anyway.

And then they converge 3/5 of the way through the game, and the rest is hackfest!

Hope I'm wrong.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

and only can play out one of them at a time to the end

I might be reading this wrong, but that sounds like it's just three linear branches that you can do in any order and you have to do them all anyway.

And then they converge 3/5 of the way through the game, and the rest is hackfest!

Hope I'm wrong.

Hmm now that you say it - yes, could mean exactly that. I hope you're wrong too.

 

[Azrael the cat]

and only can play out one of them at a time to the end

I might be reading this wrong, but that sounds like it's just three linear branches that you can do in any order and you have to do them all anyway.

And then they converge 3/5 of the way through the game, and the rest is hackfest!

Hope I'm wrong.

Hmm now that you say it - yes, could mean exactly that. I hope you're wrong too.

At best it would work like the Geneforge series: different objectives involving the same characters and world, but which will involve those NPCs in massively different ways and have different 'critically important' areas.

Having 3 completely separate plotlines sounds absurd - it would be like a choose your own adventure book in just having multiple paths but with no real interactivity (and those paths themselves would probably end up completely linear). I'd rather see 3 different starting quests that converge and which involve the same folk/regions in different ways than choose which out of 3 episodic modules to have as my chapter 1 each playthrough.

 

[Gerrard]

If you read further

not only can you play out the game differently three times, to get three distinct types of endings, but owing to your choices during the path (one of the main three) you'll get even more possible outcomes.

It seems like you'll be able to only focus on one branch (mutually exclusive events?).

Also

Geralt's choices will determine if and who will join him - and all of them are mortal and can die, and this change will have its repercussions farther, in the Witcher 3

FFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUU

 

[Grunker]

If you read further

not only can you play out the game differently three times, to get three distinct types of endings, but owing to your choices during the path (one of the main three) you'll get even more possible outcomes.

It seems like you'll be able to only focus on one branch (mutually exclusive events?).

Also

Geralt's choices will determine if and who will join him - and all of them are mortal and can die, and this change will have its repercussions farther, in the Witcher 3

FFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUU

Why, pray tell, is that FFFFFFFFFUUUUUU? Just because it's ME-like, or what?

One of worst things of BG1-BG2 transition was the total annihalation of consequence. No matter what you did you started with Jaheira and Minsc.

The Witcher having this whole "No good or evil only decisions and consequences"-thing it seems like a natural choice.

 

[Angthoron]

Sounds like they've been even more inspired by Gothic series. Sounds great. Sure, it won't likely be as awesome once implemented, but I doubt they can get away with this kind of statements being false at this point anymore.

...Unless they're also inspired by their eastern neighbours in terms of Stalker development!

 

[Gerrard]

Why, pray tell, is that FFFFFFFFFUUUUUU? Just because it's ME-like, or what?

I have nothing against them having consequences spanning across games (hell, I hope they'll really implement importing saves from the first game), but already planning what it will do in the next game reminds me of the recent trend of making games in parts without proper ending, like Assassin's Creed.

 

[Rhalle]

Face it, people: in the age of zillion-dollar budgets and zillion-polygon graphics, there is no way developers or publishers will put what are pragmatically two or three separate games in a single box.

It's just not going to happen.

And since the best they are ever going to be able to do is basically fudge it with a high degree of skill, arguably they should just focus on making a single-plot game as big and as good as they can.

 

[Azrael the cat]

Face it, people: in the age of zillion-dollar budgets and zillion-polygon graphics, there is no way developers or publishers will put what are pragmatically two or three separate games in a single box.

It's just not going to happen.

And since the best they are ever going to be able to do is basically fudge it with a high degree of skill, arguably they should just focus on making a single-plot game as big and as good as they can.

Especially since games like Deus Ex and PS:T have shown that you can get great milleage out of adding lots of trivial C+C to a completely linear story, so long as that story is told in a sufficiently interactive manner (i.e. lots of multiple paths through each map, skill-checks, characters commenting on what you've done, changes in NPC dialogue, but still the same maps and non-branching story - all the stuff Skyway hates).

I'd rather see a non-branching but highly interactive game like Deus Ex than one with 3 completely linear stories to choose from.

Come to think of it, I suspect part of the reason I miss the loss of written descriptions in crpgs is that hovering the cursor to investigate and reading the descriptions was more interactive than the graphical 'showing' that replaced it. I really think developers have got the 'show, don't tell' thing confused when they use it as a reason for dropping the written descriptions. 'Show, don't tell' is often used as a guide for novel-writing as well - it doesn't mean use graphics instead of words. It simply means go easy on the exposition. Don't say a character is evil, kind-hearted or so on: have them act and let the audience decide as their assessment of a well-written character's morality is going to be much more interesting and complex than anything you could right in exposition. But written descriptions aren't exposition - PS:T works largely because it NEVER breaks the 'show, don't tell' rule. You never get 'told' that Morte is driven by a conflcting combination of guilt, selfishness, self-loathing covered by humour and a dose of genuine goodness: you see his actions, learn his origins and work it out yourself. Far far better than any series of cutscenes could deliver.

 

[Lothers]

Will they release some modding application?

Yes.

 

[Lothers]

Will they release some modding application?

Yes.

Will it be as shitty as the Djinni Toolset?

It will be better and more flexible, acording to what developers said on official forum. We will see...