Support NeoGAF

[Skelter]

Daggerfall had a giant world too, but 99.9% of it was copy-pasted, unnecessary landscape that nobody ever wanted (or needed) to see. Bigger isn't better if what's there isn't compelling to begin with.

That said, I trust CD Projekt Red to get it right, and I'll be buying this on day one. Hopefully they'll be able to fill all that space with stuff worth seeing and doing.

Speak for yourself.

 

[Big_Al]

How long as The Witcher 3 been in development for anyway ? I hope everything quest wise is handcrafted/loot etc handplaced. I have faith in CD Projeckt though, whilst I haven't finished them yet, absolutely love what I've played of 1 and 2.

 

[Dennis]

Now I just hope they announce that there will be NO fast travel option.

 

[Alcoholikaust]

I really don't like it when games brag about stuff like this. I would rather have a densely populated/detailed world that is smaller than a massive one that is empty.

I dont really apreciate when devs talk a big game (no pun intended) without showing us progress on the finished project.

I mean if the game is that huge (doubtful)- then surely they could show us a 30 second teaser of Geralt riding through the area on horseback ala Big Boss in TPP's Afghanistan

 

[FStop7]

I HATE games like this.

Great, now I have to travel one million miles just to go from one objective to the another.

so don't buy it, sport

 

[Marcel]

I really don't like it when games brag about stuff like this. I would rather have a densely populated/detailed world that is smaller than a massive one that is empty.

Don't worry, CD Projekt Red isn't Bethesda. Placing faith in them to make a rich and interesting world won't make you feel stupid.

 

[loganclaws]

I don't see how this is vague BS. All they noted was the size of the cities.

It's vague in terms of this area being playable or just background.

 

[Turin Turambar]

Yea, I agree the size seems absurd. Was there fast travel in the Witcher 2?

Uhh, it's not that big, I'm accustomed to have bigger terrains in Arma 2 and Arma 3 (225 km2 and 275 km2).

The difference will be in "empty" terrain, in Skyrim you can walk everywhere and the horse is kind of slightly faster travel, in W3 the horse (or boat) will be essential to go from place to place.

 

[Ourobolus]

brb ordering two nvidia titans

 

[LegendofDragoonLives]

I like that it's big but I get bored as hell after 5-10 hours in open world games that are too big. I really hope they have a ton of content in there...

 

[BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO]

I really don't like it when games brag about stuff like this. I would rather have a densely populated/detailed world that is smaller than a massive one that is empty.

Knowing CD, we'll get both.

 

[Auto-Reply]

With large scale i expect areas for travelling and to me that is a good thing, i don't want to step into a forest and be bombarded with 16 sidequests. I wouldn't need large scale if that were to happen!

 

[Dennis]

All else being equal, huge world size is an unqualified GOOD.

Hard to explore on a postage stamp.

 

[Turin Turambar]

I HATE games like this.

Great, now I have to travel one million miles just to go from one objective to the another.

99% chances of the game having fast travel to known places.

 

[Phamit]

I hope it isnt to large, because i dont need a travel simulator.

 

[Interfectum]

Now I just hope they announce that there will be NO fast travel option.

The world being bigger means Geralt is able to use horses and boats to get around. He can tame horses using an Axii magical sign, or he can buy them. He can borrow boats from the beaches and ports of the world (and probably buy them as well). There's also a fast-travel option to-and-fro from known locations.

 

[SomeOneInaHat]

Daggerfall had a giant world too, but 99.9% of it was copy-pasted, unnecessary landscape that nobody ever wanted (or needed) to see. Bigger isn't better if what's there isn't compelling to begin with.

That said, I trust CD Projekt Red to get it right, and I'll be buying this on day one. Hopefully they'll be able to fill all that space with stuff worth seeing and doing.

It was also released in 1996 without the many improvements to design pipelines and tools. With the talent behind the Witcher 3 I see this as not a limitation of their quality, but the chance for CD Red to continue doing with what they have accomplish by doing what they do best, make huge and rich worlds.

 

[Dennis]

Hype rising to the stars and beyond.

 

[Karsticles]

I really don't like it when games brag about stuff like this. I would rather have a densely populated/detailed world that is smaller than a massive one that is empty.

Indeed.

 

[GazzaScotland]

Everytime I hear anything about this game in a way I am happy it got delayed. More time for new cards and cash to buy said cards. Should be amazing.

 

[jon bones]

All else being equal, huge world size is an unqualified GOOD.

Hard to explore on a postage stamp.

no it's not. i prefer games with more focus like witcher 2, not giant empty fields like skyrim.

I hope it isnt to large, because i dont need a travel simulator.

yeah, no idea why the devs ditched what made w1 & w2 good to chase after that skyrim appeal.

 

[Marcel]

no it's not. i prefer games with more focus like witcher 2, not giant empty fields like skyrim.

Good thing you'll be playing The Witcher 3 and not Skyrim. CD Projekt Red has always made compelling worlds. Now they're making a compelling world with an even greater scope and depth of exploration.

 

[MetroidPrimeRib]

All else being equal, huge world size is an unqualified GOOD.

Hard to explore on a postage stamp.

I had much more fun exploring South Park TSOT then Skyrim or just cause 2

 

[Dennis]

no it's not. i prefer games with more focus like witcher 2, not giant empty fields like skyrim.

I care about exploration above all else when it comes to gameplay.

A big part of exploration is that you have to EXPLORE for a long time before anything of importance occurs. I don't need constant high intensity stimulation.

 

[Odrion]

Surprise, the two areas are going to be largely be water mass.

 

[Angry Grimace]

I HATE games like this.

Great, now I have to travel one million miles just to go from one objective to the another.

The problem is that you end up relying on fast-travel for everything, obviating the supposed value of having a huge world.

 

[PandaPedinte]

I have faith in CDPR and I believe they can deliver their promises.

 

[Kaako]

Neat. Now just make sure that exploration is actually rewarded with cool hidden locations, worthwhile missions, rare loot and whatnot. I want the world to be dense with glorious vegetation as well with all kinds of weather simulations. Do what you do best CDPR and don't fuck this up.

 

[Angry Grimace]

All else being equal, huge world size is an unqualified GOOD.

Hard to explore on a postage stamp.

Its not like the alternative is the playable area of Goat Simulator.

 

[Marcel]

Surprise, the two areas are going to be largely be water mass.

Boat exploration? Seeking out islands and hidden coves? With the CD Projekt Red world-quality and graphical fidelity? Sounds good to me.

 

[FStop7]

no it's not. i prefer games with more focus like witcher 2, not giant empty fields like skyrim.



yeah, no idea why the devs ditched what made w1 & w2 good to chase after that skyrim appeal.

It's kind of sad that people think of Skyrim as being huge. The world was tiny. That was my biggest beef w/ the game.

 

[jon bones]

Good thing you'll be playing The Witcher 3 and not Skyrim. CD Projekt Red has always made compelling worlds. Now they're making a compelling world with an even greater scope and depth of exploration.

i really really hope their world is dense and full of stuff to do, but it remains to be seen if they can pull it off

I care about exploration above all else when it comes to gameplay.

A big part of exploration is that you have to EXPLORE for a long time before anything of importance occurs. I don't need constant high intensity stimulation.

if that's what you're going for then i can see why this is good news. i hate the idea of meandering a digital world for a long time before anything actually interesting happens. ain't nobody got time for that.

It's kind of sad that people think of Skyrim as being huge. The world was tiny. That was my biggest beef w/ the game.

how is it sad?

it feels huge because it's empty, which was my biggest beef with the game (and the "still
morrowing" combat and uninteresting procedurally generated content)

 

[zma1013]

Good. I am tired of cities who are at war with each other sitting 1 mile apart.

"Sir, it looks like the enemy is preparing for an invasion."

"How do you know this scout?"

"I looked out of my bedroom window and saw them doing training drills in my backyard."

 

[Marcel]

i really really hope their world is dense and full of stuff to do, but it remains to be seen if they can pull it off



if that's what you're going for then i can see why this is good news. i hate the idea of meandering a digital world for a long time before anything actually interesting happens. ain't nobody got time for that.

I'm as skeptical as they come but this isn't Bethesda or some other comparable paper tiger developer. CD Projekt Red brings the goods most of the time.

 

[erawsd]

no it's not. i prefer games with more focus like witcher 2, not giant empty fields like skyrim.



yeah, no idea why the devs ditched what made w1 & w2 good to chase after that skyrim appeal.

Same here. In fact, its one of the reasons I enjoyed Witcher 2 far more than Skyrim. Huge areas of nothing are not fun to traverse or explore.

I have faith that CDP will deliver but I hope they aren't spreading themselves (and the gameworld) too thin.

 

[Lulubop]

They said the game was 20 percent bigger than Skyrim, didn't they?

 

[Dennis]

Its not like the alternative is the playable area of Goat Simulator.

Skyrim was too small so this news sounds good to me. It is what it sounds like.

 

[ironcreed]

That sounds awesome.

Indeed. That is my main turn on with The Elder Scrolls games. The music, the atmosphere and the beautiful world to just be in. I can play for hours and just get lost doing my own thing on the side.

All I thought about when I played The Witcher 2 was how I wished it was set in a similar big ass world that lives up to how epic everything else was trying to be. I just felt that it needed room to breathe. Thankfully, they felt that this was the missing ingredient as well.

 

[MoonLightWave]

How big is CDPR?

 

[charsace]

no it's not. i prefer games with more focus like witcher 2, not giant empty fields like skyrim.



yeah, no idea why the devs ditched what made w1 & w2 good to chase after that skyrim appeal.

Skyrim isn't actually empty. You walk in one direction for like a minute or 2 and you will have a dozen or more things pop up on your map.

 

[L1NETT]

Remember them saying it takes 40 mintues to go from one side to another on horseback.

Game sounds monumental, no wonder it was delayed.

Thing is, if anyone can fill it with interesting content it's CDPR.

 

[Turin Turambar]

Surprise, the two areas are going to be largely be water mass.

You are being ironic, but it's partly right: from the 3 areas, one of them is an archipelago and a bit of coast, so yeah, the size on that map in km2 will be a bit "tricky".

 

[Blue Ninja]

Excellent. I hope it's all explorable, just give us some good fast-travel options for when the game sends us halfway across the map. Can't wait to just go out into the wild and get lost for sixteen days.

 

[injurai]

Wow they're going for full scale rather than 'game scale.' This game is going to be HUGE! I can't wait.

Actually sounds a bit overwhelming. I hope it's dense and interesting and not just big for the sake of being big.

Hype lowering . There's no way to have anything close to Witcher 2's level of detail at that scale.

Seems like they want to have a world that feels real and has the right scale to it, instead of a toybox where everything is right next to eachother. I am okay with this. Lol at all you who are mad about it, just use fast travel.

Pointless if there's nothing to do in it.

I'm the adventuring type. I'd rather have 12 ways to adventure as move from Content A to Content B.

Skyrim I exhausted that feeling of adventure and exploration too quickly, and ultimately I was just going through the motions of the quests.

 

[ThreePiMatt]

Daggerfall had a giant world too, but 99.9% of it was copy-pasted, unnecessary landscape that nobody ever wanted (or needed) to see. Bigger isn't better if what's there isn't compelling to begin with.

That said, I trust CD Projekt Red to get it right, and I'll be buying this on day one. Hopefully they'll be able to fill all that space with stuff worth seeing and doing.

See, I don't necessary agree with that. Lets face it, the world is full unnecessary landscape that nobody ever needs to see. The idea that every square foot of land needs to have something of note in it just makes the world feel unnatural. Running into two shrines that just so happen to be down the road from each other kind of kills the sense of scale.

I remember when Oblivion was coming out and Bethesda was pimping out their whole real NPC schedule nonsense. When it released, it was wildly unnatural and clunky. But going back to something like Daggerfall, just having the streets filled with generic, randomly generated, randomly pathing NPC made it feel "alive."

 

[Cragvis]

Just Cause 2 was 20x20 miles, that's 400 squared miles. That was big, but still manageable because of the fast modes of transport.

I never fast traveled in that game. If I had to go somewhere I ran or used a car I purchased and had delivered to me. the fast travel was just way too much like cheating. I enjoyed the scenic view as I drove along the roads.

 

[nelsonroyale]

Sounds fantastic...

 

[samus4ever]

Hype just got lowered by that. Witcher 2 had nice chunk of areas to tackle which worked well. Don't got time to ride on my horse for 30 minutes just to get to the next objective.

 

[Cheech]

I would be more excited for this if the Witcher 2 didn't have some of the shittiest, most frustratingly unfun combat I have ever played. I loved the first Witcher, but the second one is just unplayable for me. Needless to say, since the story in the second game is a mystery to me, I won't be getting this.

It's really too bad. The first Witcher was amazing.

 

[AbortedWalrusFetus]

Now I just hope they announce that there will be NO fast travel option.

There will probably be fast travel because it's in the lore. Sorceresses could teleport given the right equipment. That said, if it goes by lore those will most likely be very limited in usage. In fact, it would be sort of ideal if you could fast travel to a few major hubs and were forced to traverse manually from there.