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

In-fucking-deed. The curse of modern open worlds is purged from the Holy Potato Empire's Great Ballad.

 

If there's a game where choices have real gameplay repercussions, it's Witcher 2. The whole fucking second chapter is entirely different, for God's sake.

 

I was referring to the shit you got down to in the previous game. Besides, here you get one binary outcome, but it's placed in the middle of the game. Personally I'd prefer for my choices to impact the end result, not the way I achieved it. Both chapters ultimately lead to the same ending. Perhaps it's due to the game being the middle chapter and the finale will make things right, but right now I'm skeptical. It would be nice to be proven wrong though.

 

fuck yeah no level scaling, i love beating hard opponents for good gear!

looks like i will also buy TW3

 

Yes.
I'm no expert on music, but what they did in the TW3 trailer music fragment is they have a "build up" with no "release", the lead cuts off just before. I hope this is only a trailer thing and the full version will be closer to the original.

I doubt this is supposed to be a reference to Hejnał Mariacki.

 

They don't have the same experience as Bethesda, right?

 

As one man said, CDProjekt RED are the last of the mohicans of AAA RPGs. After the release of the sequel I finally grabbed both of them and had a really good time. I'm little concerned about the open world. Witcher was a storyfag game, and it would be ruined with Bethesda-sandbox style. If they would implement that well, than we have Codex Goty .

 

Haven't they said it's "chapter based open world" or some such? That'd mean it's like Betrayal at Krondor - open world but not like Skyrim where you can go anywhere at any time.

Personally, I don't care either way, as long as they get rid of the fucking corridors.

 

They haven't. It's completely open world.

 

No. That's incorrect. It will be one continuous world. Some "journalists" had a false impression after the E3 presentation, that it will be divided into several islands (prehaps divided by loading screens) as in Risen 2. It won't. All seven islands can be reached without loading screens, just by sailing to them on a boat. And the islands are just part of the world in W3. There will also be mainland.

 

You're right, it says in the trailer also, something "like multi-region open world".
PS: at 0:51

 

Well, the world is supposed to be seamless, *but*...

I recall reading in one of the older interviews that locations will be modular in the sense that the order in which they are visited / left will be accounted for, and leaving one location in the middle of its main quest may result in its automatic failure. At least that's what I gathered from all the talk. So yeah, it appears there won't be any loading screens but abandoning one place for the sake of wonderlust will be consequential - which may be viewed as a serious restriction in an open world.

 

My main interest in this game is because it might be a sandbox. I'd be disappointed if it weren't, and just a big story-gated, heavily scripted world.

 

They will calm down once they see there's nude women without needing to wait for mods.

 

Well, it's to be open world, but a sandbox... ? AFAIK according to devs this term applies to "Don't Starve" and other "do whatever the hell you want, just play" games. This shit won't fly in a story-driven RPG with pre-defined character with moral scruples . So don't expect a playground in Skyrim's vein.

 

Marrying those seemingly conflicting aspects was their big selling point when they revealed the game: freedom of open world + story-driven (i.e. never before achieved balance of scripted and non-scripted). It's also why they self-proclaim the game as a "crowning achievement of RPG genre" even while it's early in development. While I was never sold on their huge claims, I was hoping for a game that is more a world-to-explore than a (non-linear)story-to-go-through.

 

Define, what you believe "sandbox" means. If you are talking about a world that has absolutely no story and events and stays unaltered despite your actions, then W3 is not your game. It will have detailed story and your actions will affect the world, which can move into one of 36 different states. From what I understood, however, the game will not restrict your freedom in any artificial way. The only restrictions will be natural: monster lvl can be to high for you in a given area or storms may prevent you from sailing (I mean you still can try, if you want, but chances you'll die in the process will be high).

If you don't want to do the main plot, you don't have to. If however, you encounter a quest and decide not to follow it, it may have consequences for the state of the world, e.g. you arrive at a village being attacked by a moronic fiend that is certain to have its ass handed to him by a bunch of peasants. If you decide, you don't care, the next time you return to this village it may turn out the villagers indeed defeated the demon and as a result absorbed its essence and turned into fiends themselves. So the result of your inaction is a village full of retarded monsters.

You answered your own question already. You said they advertise "freedom of open world + story-driven" and yet you only want one of those features: open world. This is not the game you want. Skyrim is.

For me it is clear. They repeatedly said it will be one open world. The division into regions is geogrphical/political. From what I understand, those regions will function as story nodes: certain story arcs will be associated with a given region. Nothing I read or heard so far, suggests there will be separate maps for those regions.

 

This seems pretty fucking cool. Are you sure we will have this kind of stuff in the game?

 

No, the Retarded Fiend Quest was designed by me to serve as an example. Their quests won't be that cool, unless they decide to hire me . The example represents the effects of your actions/lack of actions on the state of the world and it will indeed work the way I described. I'll post a source, if I feel like looking for one.

 

The Story has to stay consistent. You cant just go where you want and then expect the Game to wait until its convinient for you to do something. Witcher can never be a Sandbox, you play Geralt you cant do things he would not do. After two Games you can not expect to play a game where you suddenly can do whatever you want. Whatever cdproject says this game will be, it still has witcher in the title, so every player will have to live with geralt as protagonist. being disapointed by the game because you play him instead of an extension of you, just because of some marketing talk is idiotic on the part of the player.

blaming the company is like blaming your parents after they said you will get a new bike for christmas, and being disappointed that it is not a harley, because they said bike.