Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Game News Some Witcher hype

Vandal

Novice
Joined
May 9, 2004
Messages
43
Location
Edmonton, AB, Canada
Vault Dweller said:
But you are the independent guy now, aren't you? Besides, if some editor/publisher sends your press-release back, tell them "Who the FUCK do you think you are dealing with? I'm Tom FUCKING Ohle, the one-man hyping machine that made everyone thinks that Baldur's Gate actually revolutionized something and started the RPG renaissance all by my FUCKING self. Now, BITCH, would you take my FUCKING press-release, written as I FUCKING see it or what?!"

haha, got it. First up, I wasn't at BioWare during the BG days... My first game at BW was Neverwinter. :)
Anyway, sure I'm "independent" in that I don't have a boss. But I do still have to run every press release by the client.
 

Vandal

Novice
Joined
May 9, 2004
Messages
43
Location
Edmonton, AB, Canada
Balor said:
PST is an example of story that makes most books seem pale in comparison. Yet, if talking about 'average RPG'... well, 'average RPG' is usually rather shitty if you compare it to PST anyway.
Talking about playing PST leaving you spoiled, cause it's a pinnacle of an RPG.
Well, Fallout comes close behind, but I guess it's a better game, but a bit worse RPG when it comes to story and interaction, though.
I just don't see a game like PST getting made these days... not only because it didn't sell all that well. It's just hard for companies to take big risks and make truly unique games... particularly really in-depth ones.
 

Deacdo

Liturgist
Joined
Oct 24, 2004
Messages
585
2007? Wow, they're really pushing their luck. The game looks like it will be pretty outdated at that point.
 

spacemoose

Erudite
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
9,632
Location
california
In light of the real time combat, I hereby propose that 'The Witcher' be from now on reffered to as 'The Twitcher'. That is all
 

MisterStone

Arcane
Joined
Apr 1, 2006
Messages
9,422
Scheduled for release in Spring 2007, The Witcher® transports players to a unique fantasy world in the role of legendary monster-slayer Geralt of Rivia. The game blends a classic role-playing experience — with extensive character and story development — and unprecedented real-time combat that is both stunning and tactical. Based in the world created by celebrated author Andrzej Sapkowski, The Witcher® is poised to reinvigorate the role-playing genre with a fresh approach to traditional PC role-playing games.

So, uh, this game...does it have something to do with cowboys at the "Circle R" ranch?
 

Twinfalls

Erudite
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
3,903
I trust that is some kind of brothel. Now that'd be a recipe for all kinds of fun times - the adventures of a care-free downtrodden worker in a grimy, depressing communist-era Polish bordello, a la 'Best Little Whorehouse in Gdansk'
 

Lurkar

Scholar
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
791
If a game came out, and their PR was "Look, we could make long complicated sentances, but we'll just say this - it's gonna fuckin' rock you on your asses," I think I'd be sold.

Please note the "bad words" are a mandatory part of that, though.
 
Joined
Feb 19, 2005
Messages
4,639
Strap Yourselves In Codex+ Now Streaming!
Yan8 said:

Hey, the video looks nice, I love the way they did this cutscene - reminds me of those in the Thief Games. Would be cool if they kept it in the game this way.

However, the narrator in the video is annoying. He doesnt sound like a native english speaker, but in fact I believe to hear a polish accent in his english. He does it better then most poles I know but still...polish accent in english sounds horrible.

I hope DC Project does the voice over in the game with professional native english speakers.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,044
Vandal said:
Vault Dweller said:
But you are the independent guy now, aren't you? Besides, if some editor/publisher sends your press-release back, tell them "Who the FUCK do you think you are dealing with? I'm Tom FUCKING Ohle, the one-man hyping machine that made everyone thinks that Baldur's Gate actually revolutionized something and started the RPG renaissance all by my FUCKING self. Now, BITCH, would you take my FUCKING press-release, written as I FUCKING see it or what?!"

haha, got it. First up, I wasn't at BioWare during the BG days... My first game at BW was Neverwinter. :)
*sigh* PR, even if you are hyping yourself, is a flight of imagination, and should never, ever be confused with facts and actual events.

Anyway, sure I'm "independent" in that I don't have a boss. But I do still have to run every press release by the client.
Well, what I'm saying is, your client hires you for your skills in the PR field, which implies that you know better and most decisions involving what to say, when to say, how to say should be left up to you. No?
 

Vandal

Novice
Joined
May 9, 2004
Messages
43
Location
Edmonton, AB, Canada
Vault Dweller said:
Btw, Tom, what does "evolution of PR" (from your site) mean?
Mostly looking at ways to integrate various elements of PR and combining them into one unit... like including media relations, community support, bloggers, etc. instead of just focusing on media. I'm also trying to improve the way the job is done, to make it easier on editors and my clients... and that drive for improvement may actually lead to me sending you guys a modified version of press releases catered to what you actually want to read :) Shoot me an email and tell me -- in no fewer words -- what you'd rather read in a press release.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,044
Vandal said:
Shoot me an email and tell me -- in no fewer words -- what you'd rather read in a press release.
No need for an email, the answer is simple. It should be readable (i.e.people should want to read it instead of glancing it over), it should be informative (less generic bullshit like epic, immersive, evolution, revolution, unprecedented, etc, more information; however, if the game is truly epic, convince your readers that it is in a few lines), it shoud create excitement, but you need to work on it, instead of just throwing in meaningless words like evolution and thinking that it would send people into a buying frenzy.

At this point, at least at the Codex, The Witcher's PR is counter-productive. It kills all the interest, while rare bits of some actual information restore it. See the problem?
 

Vandal

Novice
Joined
May 9, 2004
Messages
43
Location
Edmonton, AB, Canada
Vault Dweller said:
Vandal said:
Shoot me an email and tell me -- in no fewer words -- what you'd rather read in a press release.
No need for an email, the answer is simple. It should be readable (i.e.people should want to read it instead of glancing it over), it should be informative (less generic bullshit like epic, immersive, evolution, revolution, unprecedented, etc, more information; however, if the game is truly epic, convince your readers that it is in a few lines), it shoud create excitement, but you need to work on it, instead of just throwing in meaningless words like evolution and thinking that it would send people into a buying frenzy.

At this point, at least at the Codex, The Witcher's PR is counter-productive. It kills all the interest, while rare bits of some actual information restore it. See the problem?
Not quite as helpful as I would have hoped, my friend :) You want a press release that you want to read that doesn't contain any buzz words... so what you're actually looking for is essentially a fact sheet of the game's features. Therein lies the problem--a press release is meant to entice the editor into writing a more in-depth story that details all of these things. It's not generally meant to be posted verbatim for gamers to read.

I'll toy around with some possible concepts for a fact-oriented press release format. I'll tell you right now that there's very little chance a new format would replace the one that's currently engrained in everyone's minds -- company executives want to see those buzzwords. But I'll see what I can come up with... you've hereby volunteered yourself as a guinea pig for this little experiment. :)
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
bryce777 said:
as games they both have issues. I forgot how annoying some of the quirks in fallout are.
The out of place unbelievably hard compared to anything else in the game deathclaws.
I wouldn't say they are that hard - and you are given a lot of warning. Get into combat with a supermutant with a big gun, and you can be dead before you can think about stimpacks. Supermutants can also turn up in random encounters. You never meet a deathclaw without a lot of warning (I think).

The annoying uselessness of party members who ... charge you money to get gear back.
You can steal anything you like from a party member. They never object. It seems a little silly, but you can just think of it as a sharing workaround.



As for TW, most of the hype, and a lot of the information is reminiscent of Oblivion.
The press release gives no information to set it apart from any similar game:
...The Witcher® transports players to a unique fantasy world
Which RPG doesn't? You won't see any game describe itself as generic. Don't tell me it's unique - show me how.
...in the role of legendary monster-slayer Geralt of Rivia.
Knowing nothing about TW, this just makes the central role seem pre-defined and rather one dimensional. Perhaps it isn't?
The game blends a classic role-playing experience
This tells me nothing, since "blends" means that any particular element I think of may have been blended away. Why not use the words to elaborate on the next part.
...with extensive character and story development
Nice but vague. Perhaps you could have described more by avoiding some unnecessary stuff.
...and unprecedented real-time combat that is both stunning and tactical.
Like Oblivion? If not, how is it different? "Unprecedented" tells me nothing. "Stunning" tells me nothing. Tactical how? Tactical like Tekken, or like chess? Unless you tell me more, I'll assume Tekken (at best), which doesn't impress.
Based in the world created by celebrated author Andrzej Sapkowski...
Ok - I can find out more from this. Worth including.
The Witcher® is poised to reinvigorate the role-playing genre with a fresh approach to traditional PC role-playing games.
How? Unless you give me some idea of the approach, you will get zero interest.

Using words like "stunning" just annoys me in the same way as "moving" does in a film press release. These are not objective words, so either tell me why/how it is stunning/moving, or just let me decide for myself. Don't presume to tell me that I'll be stunned/moved without giving me any reasons.

Similarly, saying it "is poised to reinvigorate the role-playing genre with a fresh approach" doesn't get my interest unless you tell me how. Any game can aim to do that. Unless you give me some indication how they're going about it, the claim has no credibility. I'm not going to pay attention.

Perhaps the above would end up more like a short preview / review than a press release, but so what? If it increases interest then that's a good thing, even if it isn't a conventional press release.
 

Twinfalls

Erudite
Joined
Jan 4, 2005
Messages
3,903
Vandal said:
You want a press release that you want to read that doesn't contain any buzz words... so what you're actually looking for is essentially a fact sheet of the game's features.

Surely you can talk qualitatively about the game without using buzzwords? Mention how it gives real choices, real consequences? Mention that stealth really is stealth, that dialogue and story is believable, and based on a prize-winning series of novels. Mention the gritty, medieval flavour, its beautiful graphics. Describe the art style.

Talk about how RPGs are sorely lacking adult, sophisticated games, and this really is one of those, but which also offers a great escape. Name some films or other media that come to mind when you think of the Witcher. Get evocative, man!

Get them excited about it. It's not hard - people love authentic medieval stuff, it's so lacking nowadays because Hollywood has replaced it with palpably fake, cheesy 'modernised' schlock - and the gaming world has followed suit.

Describe the game's virtues in ordinary terms that you actually believe yourself. Talk about how it is not dumbed down! (if, of course, this is really the case :wink: )

Sure, it's for editors or whatnot, but they are (usually, almost) people themselves, and usually gamers of some description..... and if they are the ones who are always reading that type of generic buzzword-laden shit, then they'd be the most inclined to 'eyes glazing over' when presented yet again with the same old drivel....
 

bryce777

Erudite
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
4,225
Location
In my country the system operates YOU
galsiah said:
bryce777 said:
as games they both have issues. I forgot how annoying some of the quirks in fallout are.
The out of place unbelievably hard compared to anything else in the game deathclaws.
I wouldn't say they are that hard - and you are given a lot of warning. Get into combat with a supermutant with a big gun, and you can be dead before you can think about stimpacks. Supermutants can also turn up in random encounters. You never meet a deathclaw without a lot of warning (I think).

You are thinking of fallout 2. the nightkin are actually pushovers in fallout 1. The can still kill you with a critical hit, but otherwise they are easy. The deathclaws have some ungodly damage resistance and they have around 200 hitpoints it seems. Plus, they get a huge number of fairly damaging attacks.
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
bryce777 said:
You are thinking of fallout 2.
No I'm not. I played Fallout for the first time last week. It's not a hazy recollection :).
the nightkin are actually pushovers in fallout 1. The can still kill you with a critical hit, but otherwise they are easy.
With good armor, or without? Don't tell me you don't meet them until you get good armor. You certainly can. I got imprisoned on level 4 of the military base at character level 5 - without any armor (I had to steal a crappy gun from Ian). I got mutilated repeatedly by a variety of different guns, critical and non-critical hits alike.
With good armor, you might be right, but I'd say the deathclaws are reasonable then too.
The deathclaws have some ungodly damage resistance and they have around 200 hitpoints it seems. Plus, they get a huge number of fairly damaging attacks.
They have high resistance, and 225 hitpoints I think. Their attacks are quite nasty. I've only played with "finesse", so criticals in the eyes usually see them off fairly quickly.
Without targetted shots they're probably much harder I guess.

However, I still don't see this as a problem. In both places you meet them you are warned repeatedly that they are huge, fast, man-eating beasts with claws that shred armor easily. If you're not prepared, that's your own fault.

It shouldn't be too hard unless you die in a single round. You probably have many stimpacks by this point, right? I've always had at least one companion with me to help. Again, I think that's a reasonable expectation - if this thing single-handedly takes out caravans and all their guards (or at least it is credible that it does), why should you expect to be able to take it on successfully alone?
 

bryce777

Erudite
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
4,225
Location
In my country the system operates YOU
galsiah said:
bryce777 said:
You are thinking of fallout 2.
No I'm not. I played Fallout for the first time last week. It's not a hazy recollection :).
the nightkin are actually pushovers in fallout 1. The can still kill you with a critical hit, but otherwise they are easy.
With good armor, or without? Don't tell me you don't meet them until you get good armor. You certainly can. I got imprisoned on level 4 of the military base at character level 5 - without any armor (I had to steal a crappy gun from Ian). I got mutilated repeatedly by a variety of different guns, critical and non-critical hits alike.
With good armor, you might be right, but I'd say the deathclaws are reasonable then too.
The deathclaws have some ungodly damage resistance and they have around 200 hitpoints it seems. Plus, they get a huge number of fairly damaging attacks.
They have high resistance, and 225 hitpoints I think. Their attacks are quite nasty. I've only played with "finesse", so criticals in the eyes usually see them off fairly quickly.
Without targetted shots they're probably much harder I guess.

However, I still don't see this as a problem. In both places you meet them you are warned repeatedly that they are huge, fast, man-eating beasts with claws that shred armor easily. If you're not prepared, that's your own fault.

It shouldn't be too hard unless you die in a single round. You probably have many stimpacks by this point, right? I've always had at least one companion with me to help. Again, I think that's a reasonable expectation - if this thing single-handedly takes out caravans and all their guards (or at least it is credible that it does), why should you expect to be able to take it on successfully alone?

Well, basically, if you take the obvious course of the game, you will come on the deathclaws around level 3. I always do, anyhow.

The nightkin are tough, but they are WAY toned down compared to fallout 2.

I've also never encountered them randomly. You also really only see them later in the game unless you do something goofy. Yeah, you can say fuck up and do a southpark "Yes! We have explosives in the car!" and get imprisoned, but otherwise you will not ggo against them in the normal course of things until you are prepared for them. I mean, you CAN just go up to them in the cathedral, but if you were trying to clear it you would have to be strong enough to face them to make it past the other guards, anyway.

On the other hand, you are very much led into fighting the deathclaws pretty early on.
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
bryce777 said:
Well, basically, if you take the obvious course of the game, you will come on the deathclaws around level 3. I always do, anyhow.
You'd be going pretty fast in that case surely. If you're doing side quests I'd expect you to be higher than 3. If you're not, then why are you distracting yourself with deathclaws before getting the water chip?

I've also never encountered them randomly.
You do quite a bit around the military base, though you wouldn't be there early on. (goofiness aside)
You also really only see them later in the game unless you do something goofy. Yeah, you can say fuck up and do a southpark "Yes! We have explosives in the car!"
I certainly did something goofy, but it didn't seem odd at the time. All I said was "No I'm not a ghoul" (I didn't know the mutants were the bad guys at this stage). I then wanted information, so I asked the mutant guy who his boss was. The choice was then to kill him (and I was trying to be a diplomatic nice guy), or to go to see his boss. For all I knew his boss was some nice fellow who was going to give me the inside scoop on the real villains.

For a diplomatic, nice guy character with little information, I didn't do anything too strange. Usually I have a more shoot-first-just-in-case policy, but I was trying to be different.
There was never really an "explosives in the car" moment - my character had no real reason to lie to the supermutant, since he didn't know that they were the bad guys, didn't know that being a ghoul was less likely to get him shot, and didn't know that his boss was deep in some military base miles away, rather than in the back room.

Perhaps the moral here is that good natured, diplomats should gather information from weedy humans before confronting hulking mutants with big guns. However, even if I'd known the mutants were bad guys, I wouldn't have known that being a ghoul was a safer option - for all I know this Harry has been instructed to shoot all ghouls.

The only reason I could see for choosing the "I'm not a ghoul" option was that there must be a reason for that option to be there. Why is the option there? Because some characters will have information suggesting that it's a good thing to say. I don't have such information, but I can still deduce that it's probably the right thing to say just because there is an option to say it.

I didn't want to use this reasoning though, since it's not very in character. If I'd been free to respond in any way, I wouldn't have denied being a ghoul, so I didn't want to be influenced by the presence of a dialogue option.

I'll know better next time.

On the other hand, you are very much led into fighting the deathclaws pretty early on.
I don't think you are, are you? It is not necessary to fight the deathclaw before getting the water chip, so how are you led into it any more than any other side quest? It's one of the only quests where pretty much every NPC says "Watch out - they are giant man eating beasts with thick armor" etc. - surely that is a reason not to do it when you're level three.

In any case, I don't see how you can consider the difficulty of deathclaws a problem after the first playthrough, since you know how hard they are as a player, your character is warned about them, and you never meet them randomly. Perhaps you could meet one early on your first playthrough - though you really are warned -, but I doubt that most people would be level three at that stage. (I guess I might have had trouble at level 5, but handily enough, I was locked safely away on the other side of the map by then :))

Of course I met my first deathclaw after fighting my way out from the bottom of the military base at level 5. That experience made me more than a little cautious for the rest of the game.
I guess my Fallout experience is pretty much unique, since hardly anyone would have been unlucky/stupid enough to make the decision I did. However, on a realistic basis, you are given a lot of warnings that deathclaws are really nasty - you probably should expect to be ripped to pieces. The only reason you don't expect that is because as a player you've had years of being told "This mission is exceptionally dangerous, but there is a tiny chance you'll succeed..." before just about every major quest. The major problem is the expectation the player brings from previous games.

Taking the Fallout world alone though, are you ever warned by so many people to such an extent about anything apart from deathclaws? I don't think you are. For example, when you're sent to find a military base full of supermutants, you don't get repeated warnings - it's just the next thing on the to-do list.
In reality, the series of warnings you get about deathclaws would have you extremely cautious about confronting them, and you'd make sure to be very well prepared, and not to go alone.

Perhaps the designers of Fallout should have taken into account that players have an expectation that "Horrendously dangerous" means "A bit tricky". However, wouldn't that be dumbing down to an extent? If various NPCs tell you that these deathclaws are scary monsters that'll rip you limb from limb, do you get to complain when you confront one at level three and get ripped limb from limb? What did you expect?
 

bryce777

Erudite
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
4,225
Location
In my country the system operates YOU
Ok, I just went to necropolis at level 6 (I beat the deathclaws at level 5 after giving up at 3), and slaughtered all the supermutants pretty easily.

I actually only fought two at a time and one right after and had quite a bit of trouble with the deathclaws.

I think the ones in the base are tougher, though.

I thought it was super interesting that this playthrough, since I went to necropolis later than the other ones, when I got there all the ghouls had been killed by the supermutants. A very impressive touch.

You are right - they do warn you, but the obvious place did not seem like necropolis to get a water chip ( I had not played in some time and had forgotten where it was). To me it seemed the most obvious this is to get to the gunnrunners and get some good weapons and possibly help the adytum people out, and then clear the cathedral once I had the weapons.

I am more impressed seeing how much they flushed out a lot of these options, such as you getting captured and me finding necropolis overrun with muties.
 

kingcomrade

Kingcomrade
Edgy
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Messages
26,884
Location
Cognitive Elite HQ
I think the ones in the base are tougher, though.
Yeah, if I'm not mistaken there's two types of mutants, the ones wearing peasant rags and the ones wearing black leather which are a lot more powerful and carry heavy weapons.
 

galsiah

Erudite
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
1,613
Location
Montreal
bryce777 said:
You are right - they do warn you, but the obvious place did not seem like necropolis to get a water chip ( I had not played in some time and had forgotten where it was).
I see. I was forgetting that you wouldn't have talked to the same people I had, so what seemed like the natural next step to me, might not have to you.
I am more impressed seeing how much they flushed out a lot of these options, such as you getting captured and me finding necropolis overrun with muties.
Yes, it is nice to have a world that adapts quite a bit. It's all scripted, of course, but there do seem to be quite a few possibilities.

In particular, my experience is quite reasonable, though I'd have preferred it to have been handled slightly differently. To me it just seems as though they weren't expecting people to go that way on their first playthrough, so didn't balance it very carefully.

What I'd have preferred is for there to be a way for me to escape from military base captivity somehow without necessarily going through most of the base and destroying the vats etc. As it was, escaping was hard, but destroying the vats was relatively easy. After that, many main plot NPCs get quite confused.

If you were scripting a film (or a linear game), and you had the main character captured at the enemy base near the beginning, you wouldn't have him destroy the base. You'd have him just manage to escape with his life, then find out more of the evil plot... and return to the base later and better prepared for a final showdown.

The game needn't have enforced this, but I think it would have made more sense to provide a fairly easy escape, and make destroying the base almost impossible for a low level captive.

Of course I'm sure that the creators of Fallout would ideally have liked to add more possibilities, and further flesh out existing ones. I'm not criticising the design - just saying "wouldn't it have been great if...".


Also, there are two types of supermutants. The ones with big guns are no picnic at low level. But then neither are deathclaws.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom