Support NeoGAF

[Interceptor]

I see a slightly tweaked TW2 combat system. It's hard to say anything about how it feels, since I haven't played the game yet. But from looking at it I can't say I'm getting excited. I just don't like the fundamental feel of the combat in The Witcher games. Moving around, striking with different attacks just doesn't feel very good. That's why I want a complete overhaul, not just the addition and tweaks of certain mechanics.

Enemy AI also seems to move in the same annoying way as in previous games. Stupid and either overly aggressive or defensive.

I've seen the 50 min walkthrough in the business area. It was an awesome showing with lots of polish beer but i have to agree with this. Aside from little tweeks to the combat and the obvious jump in graphical fidelity this looks just like witcher 2. Fetch quests galore and swamps. Yep, its a Witcher game.

 

[Gojeran]

Standard fetch quest, "hey guy bring me some water from the creek about 3 minutes from here... I'd get myself except reasons."

The witcher 3 fetch quest "Bring me the head of a fucking gryhpon because it's fucking shit up around here and I'd do it myself except I'd get killed and eaten and likely shit myself in the process."

One of these fetch quests I wouldn't mind doing but both are fetch quests.

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

When Frodo takes the ring to modor is that basically an escort fetch quest? Sure you don't have to backtrack all the way (eagles!) but still.

 

[EatChildren]

When Frodo takes the ring to modor is that basically an escort fetch quest? Sure you don't have to backtrack all the way (eagles!) but still.

That quest has terrible checkpointing.

 

[Hagi]

Standard fetch quest, "hey guy bring me some water from the creek about 3 minutes from here... I'd get myself except reasons."

The witcher 3 fetch quest "Bring me the head of a fucking griffin because it's fucking shit up around here and I'd do it myself except I'd get killed and eaten and likely shit myself in the process."

One of these fetch quests I wouldn't mind doing but both are fetch quests.

One of these things is something someone whose profession is monster hunter is more likely to do also.

I mean nothing takes you out of a grand RPG where instead of helping you with information to where the massive black dragon is that's going to wreak havoc on all life they first ask you to retrieve a broach they lost down a well, or in a creek, or in a cave, or in a cupboard. I don't mind fetch quests but its how you frame it in the narrative that will have an impact on whether i roll my eyes.

 

[Gojeran]

One of these things is something someone whose profession is monster hunter is more likely to do also.

I mean nothing takes you out of a grand RPG where instead of helping you with information to where the massive black dragon is that's going to wreak havoc on all life they first ask you to retrieve a broach they lost down a well, or in a creek, or in a cave, or in a cupboard. I don't mind fetch quests but its how you frame it in the narrative that will have an impact on whether i roll my eyes.

I think this is exactly right. The problem I have with most standard fetch quests is that you likely have a much larger problem (saving the country, world, galaxy, universe etc) except the game totally breaks that narrative completely to ask you the hero to do shit anybody could do. It doesn't take into account your special abilities or talents. It would be like calling up the avengers to buy your groceries.

In the witcher case he is a mutant whose sole profession is killing dangerous monsters for coin. So in keeping with that narrative Gerald as a witcher will "fetch" the heads of those monsters. And yes it might not be as important as saving the world but you can take a minor detour to help out an entire village of people rather than some drunk idiot who dropped his hat near the cave 1 mile from town. It's not the fetch quest itself that bothers me usually it's in how they are done in most games. I'm very much looking forward to lots and lots of fetch quests in the witcher 3.

 

[erawsd]

I've only been following this game very infrequently so far, not very aware of all details -

Have they said anything about how player progression is handled?

This is my biggest concern. For me, one of the (possibly even the) most important aspect of open world games is improving your character, the whole kind of "from zero to hero" trip. Then again, it's still Geralt, a complete war machine and it'd be kind of unbelievable / not in line with the lore to let him start out barely being able to weild a sword.
So I would expect the player already starts out with some decent fighting abilities and possibly an ok looking armor, which means further progression might not feel too significant compared to other open world games. Have they mentioned anything how they'll handle this?

They haven't talked too much about how leveling up will work. They did say that it won't be like W2 where this "master swordsman" is incapable of doing some basic techniques until you level up. Other than that you will be able to upgrade your potions, crossbow, and bombs. You'll also have armors based on each of the major Witcher schools that'll be upgradable. They showed this example of the Bear:

 

[RustyNails]

I am blown away. Amazed. Flabbergasted. Stunned and knocked sideways. This game is everything I look up to in my wildest of dreams and my ideals of ideals.

Kill a monstrous griffin, take it's head, traverse through the countryside back to the city outskirts on a horse, enter the city walls, pass through the fish market, dismount the horse, enter the tavern and give the head to the guy for coin and information all without a single loading screen and visuals that cannot be described in words. It's just glorious in it's execution.

Then after a bit of adventuring, the battle theme kicked in. Gat dam if it's not the best battle theme with vocalization I have heard since Prince of Persia: Sands of Time's battle theme. I have been looking for such a battle theme for 11 years.

This game looks glory to me. I will be winning every second while I am playing it. Thank you CDP, thank you, you amazing devils. If you are reading this, I have one small, humble suggestion. The fast travel tool is a double edged sword and I have seen many RPGs break immersion because of it. It's almost required in a game of such a daunting mapsize, but people teleporting between one place to another will definitely take them out of the world you lovingly created. I suggest having an in-game auto-pilot mode where Geralt is traveling to his destination guided by his AI horse. The camera can be either fixed behind Geralt's person or it could be randomized to look at him from different angles, adding a sense of journey in his adventure. I think it would be a great addition. I suppose you can either go make a sandwich while he is on his journey or hit escape, but regardless I think it would be a neat feature to have.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

that Johnny character is one creepy ass kid

 

[Dictator93]

that Johnny character is one creepy ass kid

Looks like a child, but isn't

 

[Vigilant Walrus]

That quest has terrible checkpointing.

haha true!

 

[inky]

I've watched the 5GB video 2 or 3 times now and I just can't understand what sorcery they are using to have this game be so big, open and look this damn pretty, and now I come to this thread and someone is claiming it looks like it could be done on the 360... I... what?

smh

The worst fetch quests are the ones that have you running dull, predictable errands with few developments. Travel from X to Y to speak to character to collect object. Character wont give object unless you kill ten wolves. Kill ten wolves, get object, return to X. Here, at least to me, there's a lot of mystery and unknown in how the quest arc develops in narrative. The structure is simple but the context is unpredictable and strange. And the payoff is something equally weird and disturbing.

Precisely. Go play Dragon Age 2 or some F2P Korean MMO and then you'll have an idea what shitty fetch quests look like. Granted, this particular TW3 quest looks to be part of the main storyline, so it might not be representative of the worst the game has to offer, but most RPG quests are going to boil down to: 'speak to NPC/get quest -> go to some area -> look for/interact with something -> come back to NPC and speak some more'. There are so many degrees to this formula that bunching all quests together as the same without all the details is pretty dumb.

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

Looks like a child, but isn't

sounds like one too, but that's not what makes him creepy in my opinion

 

[Shredderi]

They haven't talked too much about how leveling up will work. They did say that it won't be like W2 where this "master swordsman" is incapable of doing some basic techniques until you level up. Other than that you will be able to upgrade your potions, crossbow, and bombs. You'll also have armors based on each of the major Witcher schools that'll be upgradable. They showed this example of the Bear:

Oh sweet! I love it when games have armors that actually change how your character looks. This upgradeable armor set thing is a very cool feature. Can't wait.

 

[Bogey]

They haven't talked too much about how leveling up will work. They did say that it won't be like W2 where this "master swordsman" is incapable of doing some basic techniques until you level up. Other than that you will be able to upgrade your potions, crossbow, and bombs. You'll also have armors based on each of the major Witcher schools that'll be upgradable. They showed this example of the Bear:

Thanks for the info!

To be honest, that doesn't sound overly appealing to me, though. That picture is actually a perfect example. The best armor doesn't really look that much better than the worst one. If you see them side by side, yea sure you'll make out which one of those is supposed to be the best one. But even the starter armor looks pretty badass already.
Same goes for the skills you mentioned. I'd like to see my character improve visually in the first place, say develop some better combat technique. I, personally, don't care too much for 5% better potions or anything of that kind.

So I think I'll wait and see how this all turns out. I can't deny this game has a lot of aspects that look groundbreakingly good. But there are basically three things that can immediately ruin any open world RPG for me: Boring combat, a too confined world/too little exploration, and the lack of significant character development. I'll probably keep my eyes open for reviews in the future to check how the game manages the latter.

 

[lordfuzzybutt]

I've watched the 5GB video 2 or 3 times now and I just can't understand what sorcery they are using to have this game be so big, open and look this damn pretty, and now I come to this thread and someone is claiming it looks like it could be done on the 360... I... what?

smh



Precisely. Go play Dragon Age 2 or some F2P Korean MMO and then you'll have an idea what shitty fetch quests look like. Granted, this particular TW3 quest looks to be part of the main storyline, so it might not be representative of the worst the game has to offer, but most RPG quests are going to boil down to speak to NPC, go to some area, look for/interact with something, come back to NPC and speak some more. There are so many degrees to this formula that bunching all quests together as the same without the details is pretty dumb.

Or like in the newest Risen 3 game where they ask you to fetch some clothes, mushrooms and shits that are right the fuck right under his nose. I don't see anyone screaming about that and still praise the game. I mean, what the fuck?

 

[Quotient]

I think this is exactly right. The problem I have with most standard fetch quests is that you likely have a much larger problem (saving the country, world, galaxy, universe etc) except the game totally breaks that narrative completely to ask you the hero to do shit anybody could do. It doesn't take into account your special abilities or talents. It would be like calling up the avengers to buy your groceries.

In the witcher case he is a mutant whose sole profession is killing dangerous monsters for coin. So in keeping with that narrative Gerald as a witcher will "fetch" the heads of those monsters. And yes it might not be as important as saving the world but you can take a minor detour to help out an entire village of people rather than some drunk idiot who dropped his hat near the cave 1 mile from town. It's not the fetch quest itself that bothers me usually it's in how they are done in most games. I'm very much looking forward to lots and lots of fetch quests in the witcher 3.

The side quests (and main quests) in Witcher are done well. It completely makes sense that you would kill a beast for coin. Mass Effect is a great example of side quests that completely kill immersion - "i know you need to save the world, but please come and rescue my cat out of the tree!".

 

[erawsd]

Thanks for the info!

To be honest, that doesn't sound overly appealing to me, though. That picture is actually a perfect example. The best armor doesn't really look that much better than the worst one. If you see them side by side, yea sure you'll make out which one of those is supposed to be the best one. But even the starter armor looks pretty badass already.
Same goes for the skills you mentioned. I'd like to see my character improve visually in the first place, say develop some better combat technique. I, personally, don't care too much for 5% better potions or anything of that kind.

So I think I'll wait and see how this all turns out. I can't deny this game has a lot of aspects that look groundbreakingly good. But there are basically three things that can immediately ruin any open world RPG for me: Boring combat, a too confined world/too little exploration, and the lack of significant character development. I'll probably keep my eyes open for reviews in the future to check how the game manages the latter.

I see what you're saying. However, he's the world greatest monster slayer, he should start out "badass" and get more badass as the game progresses. I disagree that there isn't much difference between those armors. If I wasn't looking at them side by side I probably wouldn't know that they are the same armor, other than the coat length, the last one looks completely different to me.

Theres still going to be a classic "level up" progression where you learn and enhance your skills. The Potion, weapon, and armor upgrades are in addition to that.

 

[PFD]

I've only been following this game very infrequently so far, not very aware of all details -

Have they said anything about how player progression is handled?

This is my biggest concern. For me, one of the (possibly even the) most important aspect of open world games is improving your character, the whole kind of "from zero to hero" trip. Then again, it's still Geralt, a complete war machine and it'd be kind of unbelievable / not in line with the lore to let him start out barely being able to weild a sword.
So I would expect the player already starts out with some decent fighting abilities and possibly an ok looking armor, which means further progression might not feel too significant compared to other open world games. Have they mentioned anything how they'll handle this?

If it's like the Witcher 2, you start out with a full suit of armor and all 5 spells from the get go

 

[Sentenza]

They haven't talked too much about how leveling up will work.:

I remember reading months ago in their "vision document" that they were planning to go for "no exp from killing mobs" and use a goal-driven system instead (i.e. giving you exp only when you accomplish specific tasks, small or big).
But they never mentioned this again in any successive interview. I'm wondering if their plans about that changed.
I hope that's not the case, because goal-driven exp is absolutely brilliant and more games should start embrace it. It also absolutely discourages grinding.

 

[Philippo]

How people can even complain about these quests is beyond my imagination. I mean, not only are they presented (writing, visual directoon) in a compelling manner way above what are we used to see, but they looks to be always lore friendly and coherent within the game's world. And most importantly they gives you choices that probably alter the world state (which is something the saga and the developer are known for, so you know it'll be there), for example i'm sure collaborating with the heart-tree (or killing him lile the player did) would have probably impacted the village, it's just that CDPR just decided to not show us.

 

[pettson3816]

I think this looks very promising. I've only played a small portion of the other two games, but is my assumption true that you can only have swords as weapons? If that's the case it takes away some of my schoolboylike anticipation for this game.

 

[erawsd]

I remember reading months ago in their "vision document" that they were planning to go for "no exp from killing mobs" and use a goal-driven system instead (i.e. giving you exp only when you accomplish specific tasks, small or big).
But they never mentioned this again in any successive interview. I'm wondering if their plans about that changed.
I hope that's not the case, because goal-driven exp is absolutely brilliant and more games should start embrace it. It also absolutely discourages grinding.

That would make sense. Watching the video Geralt doesnt appear to be getting exp from killing enemies, at least its not being communicated to the player. When he completes quests there is an Exp notification.

 

[Sanctuary]

Witcher 2 was a gorgeous looking game, yes.
But it was also a very linear one, you could not stray from the path, even in the forest areas there were like 3 paths that you could actually use and the one more "open" area was very barren.

Witcher 3 is massive and has no restrictions where you can go whatsoever, thats why its called "open world" something like skyrim or gta.

Here are some screens for comparison, a city in witcher 2:.

Are all of these shots from the console version of TW3, and you aren't comparing the console version of TW2 to some PC shots of TW3? I guess saying that the game looks like it could have been done on the 360 was slightly off, but it was more about the way I worded it than anything. The game in the video, which is supposed to be the PC version, isn't making me think "WOW" like the PC version did (which is what I played on high) in 2011. To me, the game in the video looks like it's about the same as what was done on last gen hardware. I guess the comparison is kind of dumb though since I'm comparing the console version to the much better looking PC version, but even then the console versions were no slouches for what the hardware offered. Looking at that video was actually mildly disappointing, because I was expecting much better on the PC. Like I said though, it could have just been the Youtube quality, but I doubt it. To me, the leap really isn't that noticeable. But I didn't say it looked like crap either.

Good post but some of the images are kinda old. But on point. Sadly so many people failed to factor in the size of this game.

Giving the appearance of an open world doesn't necessarily make it so. In much of the video Geralt would be in what looked like an expansive space, but couldn't actually move beyond the seemingly constricting, invisble walls when not running around in the areas that connected the "zones" like the center of a bike wheel. I wouldn't go as far as to say it looked like a corridor game, but it doesn't look as free as what the developers and many are hyping it up to be. To me it looks about as free as what we had in TW2 in terms of gameplay space, the main difference being that you can travel to just about any location (zone) whenever you want.

 

[Loginius]

Are all of these shots from the console version of TW3, and you aren't comparing the console version of TW2 to some PC shots of TW3? I guess saying that the game looks like it could have been done on the 360 was slightly off, but it was more about the way I worded it than anything. The game in the video, which is supposed to be the PC version, isn't making me think "WOW" like the PC version did (which is what I played on high) in 2011. To me, the game in the video looks like it's about the same as what was done on last gen hardware. I guess the comparison is kind of dumb though since I'm comparing the console version to the much better looking PC version, but even then the console versions were no slouches for what the hardware offered. Looking at that video was actually mildly disappointing, because I was expecting much better on the PC. Like I said though, it could have just been the Youtube quality, but I doubt it. To me, the leap really isn't that noticeable. But I didn't say it looked like crap either.



Giving the appearance of an open world doesn't necessarily make it so. In much of the video Geralt would be in what looked like an expansive space, but couldn't actually move beyond the seemingly constricting, invisble walls when not running around in the areas that connected the "zones" like the center of a bike wheel. I wouldn't go as far as to say it looked like a corridor game, but it doesn't look as free as what the developers and many are hyping it up to be. To me it looks about as free as what we had in TW2 in terms of gameplay space, the main difference being that you can travel to just about any location (zone) whenever you want.

I think that TW2 screenshot is from the pc version, doesnt really matter anyway.

I think you dont get it, there are NO invisible walls, NO zones.
It is an open world like you have seen in games like skyrim or gta, this has been said and shown by the devs multiple times now, everything you can see you can go to.

This is a completely different beast than TW2, unless youre saying the devs and everyone who had the chance to play it is just bullshiting us.

 

[MNC]

This demo made me start the witcher 1. My oh my, that game aged pretty badly. What kind of battle gameplay does 2 have?

 

[flaxknuckles]

This demo made me start the witcher 1. My oh my, that game aged pretty badly. What kind of battle gameplay does 2 have?

Before you play Witcher 2, install the Combat Rebalance mod. I wish my first playthrough was with that because the vanilla combat is sweaty asscheeks.

 

[Sentenza]

This demo made me start the witcher 1. My oh my, that game aged pretty badly.

It really isn't a matter of age. It was a shitty combat system even when it was new.
Hell, I even remember finding it "interesting" at first, mostly because the way camera and targeting worked made me guess it would turn into a "tactical game" later on.
It turned out that after a few level ups you just had to click rhythmically to be done with most fights.

The Witcher 2 is entirely different and a lot closer to a typical third person action game. According to some people just as shitty, but I'd argue that while not exactly worthy of praise is actually a massive improvement over the first.

 

[Guri]

It really isn't a matter of age. It was a shitty combat system even when it was new.
Hell, I even remember finding it "interesting" at first, mostly because the way camera and targeting worked made me guess it would turn into a "tactical game" later on.
It turned out that after a few level ups you just had to click rhythmically to be done with most fights.

The Witcher 2 is entirely different and a lot closer to a typical third person action game. According to some people just as shitty, but I'd argue that while not exactly worthy of praise is actually a massive improvement over the first.

There's actually a combat rebalance mod for TW1 as well, but I never tried it. Maybe it's a good choice?

 

[Sentenza]

There's actually a combat rebalance mod for TW1 as well, but I never tried it. Maybe it's a good choice?

I heard good things about it but never bothered replaying the game since it was released, so I couldn't tell how much it actually improves things.
It should at very least solve the "you can win fights without even looking at them and clicking every 3 seconds" syndrome, though.

 

[OrlanisWorks]

Game looks fantastic, and the combat looks a lot more engaging than the first one (and I haven't played the second one yet).

 

[Maedhros]

Never found a problem with The Witcher 1 combat. When I understood the concept (it plays more like Diablo than a 3rd person action game), then it just clicked. It's not very good, but not that bad too.

The game is still pretty cool, IMO.

 

[injurai]

Never found a problem with The Witcher 1 combat. When I understood the concept (it plays more like Diablo than a 3rd person action game), then it just clicked. It's not very good, but not that bad too.

The game is still pretty cool, IMO.

I liked that it was simple, a lot of the game was in the preparation of the battle. It was really fun to play on higher difficulties and be forced to use all the tonics and stuff.

 

[dex3108]

I liked that it was simple, a lot of the game was in the preparation of the battle. It was really fun to play on higher difficulties and be forced to use all the tonics and stuff.

I am playing W1 now and preparation for battle on Normal for me is find Place of Magick/do ritual, apply rune or stone on my sword (depends on opponent if i fight creature i use silver one if i fight humans i use blue or red meteorite sword) and that is most of times enough. I use potions sometimes too usually Swallow.

But yeah combat is boring and sometimes doesn't work.

 

[Denton]

I don't really understand the fetch quest complaints when generally that's what all RPG missions boil down to, even linear ones. If you really want to be picky most of both The Witcher and The Witcher 2 consisted of running errands, fetching shit, and killing stuff for people. This is fundamental quest/mission structure in order to highlight the core game mechanics, that being combat, dialogue, and exploration. And all three of these pillars, among others, are exactly what Geralt does in this quest arc. The problem is when this formula is overdone and makes you feel like you're treading water within the narrative, running errands without getting anywhere or evolving the lore and narrative.

I feel the demonstrated quest arc does a decent job of using a traditional formula to construct an interesting arc. The question is "Where's Ciri?", and it develops through several tiers without spelling out said developments to the player. You don't know what the creature is before you meet it. You don't know why it has lost its voice (this isn't fully explored in the demo either). You don't know what's at the top of the hill before you get there. You don't know what's going on with the possessed woman. You don't know what bond has been formed between her and the townsfolk. You don't know exactly what they're sending you to do. You're not sure what beasts you'll encounter on your travels. And in the end you're given a choice where you're not sure what is right or wrong.

The worst fetch quests are the ones that have you running dull, predictable errands with few developments. Travel from X to Y to speak to character to collect object. Character wont give object unless you kill ten wolves. Kill ten wolves, get object, return to X. Here, at least to me, there's a lot of mystery and unknown in how the quest arc develops in narrative. The structure is simple but the context is unpredictable and strange. And the payoff is something equally weird and disturbing.

Voice of reason.

Fetch quests are ok if done well. And these showcased are pretty much the best ever.

I finished my playthrough of New Vegas and all its DLCs couple days ago. Old World Blues especially should have been called Fetch Quest Blues, since the only thing I did there was fetching stuff. As much as I like NV, Witcher 3 is on another level.
And I bet vast number of quests will be actually even more inventive. I still remember the party from Witcher 1, or having hangover from Witcher 2..

 

[Quotient]

Never found a problem with The Witcher 1 combat. When I understood the concept (it plays more like Diablo than a 3rd person action game), then it just clicked. It's not very good, but not that bad too.

The game is still pretty cool, IMO.

Even when i finally understood the combat in Witcher 1 it never felt satisfying. I didn't feel any connection between my mouse click and the swing of the sword. They did improve it dramatically in Witcher 2, but it still has the same disconnected feeling for me.

 

[Denton]

I always recommend playing Witcher 1 on hard and in over the shoulder mode. It does away with the flaming sword icon, so the combat becomes more about timing, plus of course you have to use all the other tools at your disposal. Personally I never had any problem with it. Geralt's animations were so bad ass (especially in group style) that it was always satisfying for me to look at and play through. Not to mention that for me, combat in RPGs is not the reason I play them anyway.

 

[injurai]

I am playing W1 now and preparation for battle on Normal for me is find Place of Magick/do ritual, apply rune or stone on my sword (depends on opponent if i fight creature i use silver one if i fight humans i use blue or red meteorite sword) and that is most of times enough. I use potions sometimes too usually Swallow.

But yeah combat is boring and sometimes doesn't work.

In higher difficulty you have to plan specifically to engage your target as opposed to just covering all bases. A bit of min maxing. There is all that lore on certain species and plants etc that you end up caring about. Those books you know.

 

[-Deimos]

They haven't talked too much about how leveling up will work. They did say that it won't be like W2 where this "master swordsman" is incapable of doing some basic techniques until you level up. Other than that you will be able to upgrade your potions, crossbow, and bombs. You'll also have armors based on each of the major Witcher schools that'll be upgradable. They showed this example of the Bear:

The armor designs seem pretty heavy for a Witcher.

 

[Guri]

I heard good things about it but never bothered replaying the game since it was released, so I couldn't tell how much it actually improves things.
It should at very least solve the "you can win fights without even looking at them and clicking every 3 seconds" syndrome, though.

new design of the PC’s and NPC’s parameters,
full armor system and armor type/weapon/combat style dependencies,
damage fully dependent on weapons as in most cRPG games,
full skill tree overhaul, including sword style rules,
much faster and lore-close combat,
limited but more powerful monsters option,
dozens of non-combat related improvements,
fully customizable installation with the ability to install each feature seperately.

http://www.moddb.com/mods/full-combat-rebalance1

 

[Sentenza]

The armor designs seem pretty heavy for a Witcher.

Actually from what I've heard that kind of coat (I cant' remember the exact name, but it seems to be a typical traditional Slavic tunic-coat with large sleeves) is how the books describe Geralt dressing most of the time.
EDIT: well, just to be clear I'm referring to the general idea. The one in this picture is a lot more "fancy and cool" cmpared to the more spartan-looking one I've seen in some pictures when this thing was explained to me.

 

[-Deimos]

Actually from what I've heard that kind of coat (I cant' remember the exact name, but it seems to be a typical traditional Slavic tunic-coat with large sleeves) is how the books describe Geralt dressing most of the time.
EDIT: well, just to be clear I'm referring to the general idea. The one in this picture is a lot more "fancy and cool" cmpared to the more spartan-looking one I've seen in some pictures when this thing was explained to me.

It's the long coats that seem like they would interfere with his movement.

I don't really remember anything about how he dresses in the books, I should pay more attention.

 

[On Demand]

What were those 3 oversized humanoids? I never played a Witcher game before, do i need to play the first two to understand the story for 3? I'll probably watch some youtube gameplay since i don't have a gaming PC or 360.

 

[phaze]

What were those 3 oversized humanoids? I never played a Witcher game before, do i need to play the first two to understand the story for 3? I'll probably watch some youtube gameplay since i don't have a gaming PC or 360.

I assume you mean the three witches. Well it was pretty much spelled out for you, they're just some monsters/whatever that happen to inhabit this particular area. It's their first appearance in the games.

I would say you should play at least the 2nd one as it plants the seeds of the entire Wild Hunt story for the gamers. I'm talking mainly about the (obviously spoilers for W2) series of flashbacks where Geralt (who lost his memory at the beginning of first game) finally remembers some of the events of his past. Witcher 1 is a much more stand alone game though WH shows up there as well. You can of course jump into W3 and eventually make sense of things but you'll probably miss a lot. Just imagine dropping into Mass Effect 3 with no experience of previous games.

 

[Indiedevs]

What were those 3 oversized humanoids? I never played a Witcher game before, do i need to play the first two to understand the story for 3? I'll probably watch some youtube gameplay since i don't have a gaming PC or 360.

No, probably not. This game has never been released on Playstation before, so that would be crazy if they did. You didn`t have to play the first game in order to enjoy Witcher 2.

 

[erawsd]

The latest issue of Gamestar features a ton of new Witcher details, particularly about how the open world works. Translation comes from a user of their forums.

- The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt's open world isn't an open world in the classic sense (Skyrim, GTA, and the likes) where you actually can walk from one end to the other in one go

- instead it's more of a pooling or combination of hubs i.e. separate regions

- according to Peter Gelencser the reason behind this approach is the vast distances between the locations (going from Novigrad to Skellige Islands would take one day at least) which simply would be impossible to fill with meaningful content

- how exactly one would travel from hub to hub isn't decided yet, but the devs are experimenting with different solutions

- one way to 'switch' between regions is fast travel (but only if they were visited before of course)

- all regions won't be accessible right from start, they're rather 'unlocked' as one progresses in the story

- The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt starts with a smaller hub which serves as the tutorial

- Peter Gelencser assures that there won't be any key prompts to press, the tutorial hub is more of a little sandbox or playground to put Geralt's combat skills to the test, to get a feel for how decisions affect the outcome of quests and to explore the surroundings like one would do in the bigger regions later on

- Novigrad and surroundings is the size of about 8.5 by 8.5 kilometers = 72.25 square kilometers

- the Skellige archipelago is the size of about 8 by 8 kilometers = 64 square kilometers

- those two alone result in an area of 136 square kilometers which dwarves Skyrim's 41 square kilometers

- even when discounting the 2 kilometers wide 'ring' of visible, but not explorable panorama around each of those two regions you would still have respectable 78 square kilometers for two regions alone

- Novigrad & surroundings and the Skellige archipelago are obviously only two of 'several' regions to explore, and even if the other regions were considerably smaller the world of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt would still be more extensive as the promised '20% bigger than Skyrim'

- Novigrad and No Man's Land are part of the same hub

- according to Peter Gelencser THAT huge tree (as seen during the Griffin hunt or while getting the bottle with Johnny's voice) is as high as a building with ten stories

- the boundaries of each region are most likely natural, like big bodies of water, unpassable rivers or mountain ranges

- there are 'interesting things' at the bottom of lakes, like parts of valuable Witcher armor sets Geralt is able to smith or craft by himself

- swimming is not possible everywhere, especially lakes on the Skellige archipelago are too cold even for Geralt

- Geralt can swim in the seas but shouldn't when there's a storm coming up, which could be lethal

- if there's particularly heavy sea Geralt can fall out of boats

- unlike in the Gothic series there are no creatures blocking off certain areas of the world

- the 'recommended potions' section in the UI is triggered when tracking (via Witcher Senses) a creature Geralt has encountered before

- noonwraiths appear only at noon (duh)

- there is no simulation of realistic Moon phases

- the lumps of mud the Water Hags are throwing trigger some kind of smudge effect on the screen when Geralt is hit by them

- the 'Igni-Flamethrower' skill variation can target multiple opponents at once (via upgrade)

- fellow Witchers become hireable over the course of the story (they have to be convinced to fight on Geralt's side)

- Peter Gelencser elaborates on a few possible scenarios to circumvent or overcome a roadblock (set up by Nilfgaard?):

a) Geralt might run across a farmer in a nearby village who while excavating in his basement discovered a cave system ridden with the undead that passes under the roadblock

b) Geralt might talk to the people waiting in front of the roadblock and, by giving them supplies, convince them to go up against the barricade and tear it down

c) Geralt might do the guards of the roadblock a favour for safe passage

- regions or hubs are 'unlocked' after one another by completing the tasks or quests in the preceding regions or hubs

- Geralt may return to previous regions at any time, it might be even mandatory to do so

- no comment on how much feature complete the game is (meaning that game mechanics and game elements are still being iterated on)

 

[phaze]

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt's open world isn't an open world in the classic sense (Skyrim, GTA, and the likes) where you actually can walk from one end to the other in one go

I smell a backlash !

Though I always suspected it with how they were going on about the 3 distinct regions in the beginning.

 

[puffyshirt]

Hmm, I have no doubt the game will be massive, but that "open" structure kind of makes me curious. That's a big reason big open environments feel big and open.

 

[tryagainlater]

Why does everything always come back to Skyrim? It's a terrible example of how to do open world right. This game sounds pretty great though. I'm excited. Just have to find a way to play the second game.

 

[Dominic_Shade]

- The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt's open world isn't an open world in the classic sense (Skyrim, GTA, and the likes) where you actually can walk from one end to the other in one go

- instead it's more of a pooling or combination of hubs i.e. separate regions

I am completely okay with this. A "pooling of hubs" sounds more exciting to explore than a "classic open-world". I get the idea that each region will have its own distinct style, culture, and populace. I dig it. =D