-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt (2014, PC/NextGen): Game Informer March 2013 [Updated OP]
- Thread starter indigo-cyclops
- Start date
We're talking about a company that tried to take on CoD, Zynga, WoW, and Steam simultaneously and a series that has sold 8 million copies over two games.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess they're not sweating this one out.
EA probably does not give a shit.
Elder Scrolls isn't big enough to intimidate EA. EA is pretty freakin' big.
But Witcher (indirectly CDPR) can get big enough to eventually stand toe to toe with Bethesda's games. Infact both FROM Soft and CDPR have franchises that have the potential to grow massively big. Souls has been growing exponentially too with every release. Next gen will be very interesting. Bethesda and Bioware's rpg's probably will not have the kind of success they enjoyed this gen.
Level scaling in MMO's only has its place in casual themepark MMO's, not sandboxes. I'm actually against any kind of scaling in any RPG. It just screams of artificial difficulty. In any MMO if you spent more time and effort leveling, naturally you should be expected to kill mobs easier than someone who just began. If they really want to do something about Level 5 and level 60 players pairing up, they can put in instanced arcade stuff for fun, but otherwise scaling outside just removes half the purpose of leveling up in the first place.
Sentenza
Member
I don't know. Both Witcher games so far sold in numbers comparable to the Dragon Age saga and their last product, unlike Bioware's one, was on a high tone.
Beside, when Bioware released DA2 the internet as a whole was constantly remembering them how shitty it was compared to TW2.
It was one of the most overused comparisons you could read about, at the time.
It doesn't strike me as so absurd, to be honest.
EA extremely concerned confirmed.
I would be happy to be wrong in that case. Maybe CDProjekt could make EA step their game up regarding the way they handled the Dragon Age franchise.
Can you name one time EA has shown concern over a franchise that has sold less than theirs?
100% Agreed. Yeah even leveling shouldn't really be there in sandboxes. Hopefully sandboxes can make their comeback. it sure will be good to have some variety again. If hardcore RPG's (like Souls) made a comeback in current gen hopefully it'll happen for MMO's next gen.
Sentenza
Member
I have no freaking clue?
I don't spend my time around EA people, you know.
Maybe they do it at every single release, for all I can tell.
I'm just reporting a news by a big site that claims to have insiders giving out this information.
The problem is that much of TW's numbers come from longevity sales. I don't think EA cares about those.
GillianSeed79
Member
I'm really not a fan of level scaling, so I'm happy it's out. It will probably help the game's narrative despite it being in an open world setting. I kind of understand why the Elder Scrolls franchise has adopted level scaling even though I don't like it. With like Skyrim, their whole pitch is basically go ahead and go anywhere and do anything you want and you can ignore the main story if you want. The problem is, especially in Skyrim, is that even though enemies scale with you, at some point you become a walking god and even high level enemies are push overs and there's relatively no challenge. With narrative heavy games, no level scaling effectively forces you to stay in one certain area until your level is high enough that you can venture further into the world and tackle new quests.
I like the old JRPG convention of having a big world but areas of the world is effectively locked off due to high level enemies until you level up appropriately. Plus it adds an element or risk-reward if you venture into a high level area at a somewhat lower level, but can gain powerful loot if you survive a dungeon or whatever.
One thing I just thought of is that they will probably have to redesign the skill tree system and leveling system if the game is going to be so big. In the Witcher 2, I think the max level you could get was just above 30 and you could only really master one skill branch per playthrough.
I like the old JRPG convention of having a big world but areas of the world is effectively locked off due to high level enemies until you level up appropriately. Plus it adds an element or risk-reward if you venture into a high level area at a somewhat lower level, but can gain powerful loot if you survive a dungeon or whatever.
One thing I just thought of is that they will probably have to redesign the skill tree system and leveling system if the game is going to be so big. In the Witcher 2, I think the max level you could get was just above 30 and you could only really master one skill branch per playthrough.
Sentenza
Member
I don't think it makes any difference, when you are talking about incoming sequels.
If, say, 3 million people played Dragon Age 2 and 3 million people played TW2 after a couple of years, you will have a comparable user base waiting for the sequels of both games, regardless of which produced more revenues at the time.
What's even more interesting, CDPR made comparable lifetime sales mostly on one single platform.
TW3 would be their first multiplatform product from day one, at the start of a new generation.
That said, I honestly don't even think there is that much competition. Big budget RPGs are so few in numbers that lovers of the genre will most likely buy everything available.
I am amused at the idea of them rushing DA3 after DA2 was so poor.
IdreamofHIME
Member
I just bought Witcher 2 for the 360 today, is not playing the 1st game any hindrance at all?
I think you're being a bit too defensive mate, calm down a bit.
Sentenza
Member
No, I'm not, it's just that the question doesn't make sense.
How can I know how EA people generally feel about other releases?
OfWhiteSkinOnRedLeather
Member
No. Just read up on the story somewhere if you want and you'll be fine. There are elements to the stories in both game that lead up to the third, but reading a summary would suffice as they're not the major plots for their respective games.
Not really. The game catches you up to speed pretty quickly.
TW1 is a great game in its own right.
Looks like PC remains their biggest focus:
Yeah so was BF3 for a while. We'll see.
But Witcher 2 was already pretty consolized so there's as much precedent behind CDP as EA recently. I need to see proof in the gameplay before I'll believe it.
This answer, it's so good!
Trusting what EA says. Ho ho ho.
I keep reading about this consolization and it keeps not making sense. BF 3 was consolized. DA 2 was consolized. DX:HR was consolized. How was TW 2 consolized?
It was built around the 360 gamepad, the gameplay was streamlined into a more console action game and I'm convinced the game didn't look nearly as good as it could have considering how close the 360 version looked. No matter what wizardry they pulled you're still dealing with 2005 hardware in a 2011 (supposedly) PC focused game. It shouldn't have looked as close as it did. Plus IIRC it didn't even have DX10 support let alone 11.
That's why the rumors and eventual confirmation of open world and releasing on consoles again (maybe even same time, I don't remember) had me so worried. It's really easy to keep slipping further into console land once you take your first step. We only have dozens of other big time companies as proof of that.
Looks like PC remains their biggest focus:
Good to hear but I do not have a gaming PC and I hope that they do a better job at porting TW3 on to the next gen consoles compared to what happened with TW2. I am not willing to pay full price if they just do quick n dirty port to earn some more orens.
WorstUsernameEver
Member
Controller support, a different and more action-y combat system, worse inventory interface. Actually, besides the interface, all of those changes were good, so I guess the "consolization" was a good thing?
TW2 might have been consolized in terms of game design and mechanics, but in terms of graphics it was more than adequate for the PC platform. This is also what the quoted Twitter image shows - i.e. that the PC platform will be the best not specifically in terms of game design, but in terms of performance and IQ.
Looks like PC remains their biggest focus:
Good to hear.
Like every multiplats decently handled, next-gen won't be an exception.
PC was and still is the best version of that game.
Spectacular Dr Dawg
Member
That's good.
If they're really going to make it more like Gothic they should add the ability to jump and climb stuff. It adds a lot to the exploration.
My biggest concern at the moment is if they can make a world of that size that is still well designed and not filled with useless fetch quests.
And I really hope they make a proper kb/m UI this time. The console style UI in The Witcher 2 was pretty bad.
They didn't just support controllers. The game was 100% designed around a controller with keyboard and mouse controls being an afterthought, just like Risen 2.
I also felt that the game was overall simpler than the first game. The first game had more important decisions and more memorable quests in my opinion. There wasn't anything like the detective quest line in the second game.
Baconsammy
Banned
Will buy whichever console version arrives first.
Yeah it was created with controller in mind and inventory/stat UI was just horrible for PC. I hope they will deliver this time proper PC UI without damn inventory list.
j0hnny_385
Member
buy TW 1 & 2 on GoG.com or Steam (they're cheap) and try them. Best way to find out.
Respect for CDPR.Looks like PC remains their biggest focus:
OdysseusVA
Banned
Sentenza
Member
Actually, you don't have a next gen console either, which gives to your rebuttal quite an ironic flavor.
That's probably the first time I read someone complaining about TW2 port on 360.
Unanimous consensus seemed that the game was anything but a "poor, rushed port".
Eh, pretty much.
There are things I didn't liked about TW2 but the only one I would (partially) blame on a console-friendly development was the awful inventory.
I strongly disagree, considering how the game played better with M&KB.
It wasn't a perfect control system for sure, but I would blame that more on CDPR shortcomings than on a console-centirc development.
So true, and yet for some reason developers keep ignoring this stuff in action RPGs.
The controller thing and the streamlining I won't debate being subjective and all, even though I disagree. But 360 looking close to the PC? That's just plain wrong. It looked great for a 360 game but let's not get crazy here.
Save the inevitability of me purchasing a next gen system over a gaming PC.
And I never suggested they did a "poor, rushed port". Given the scale and magnificence of TW2 it was indeed a great job but given the gap in HW spec between a relatively new PC and a 7 year old console, the differences are substantial. I am just hoping that the differences between the PC and next gen console versions are minimized (perhaps to the point of where the advantages are in the domain of resolution, AA and AF) with TW3.
Looks like PC remains their biggest focus:
Only significant if that means mod support, IMO.
I don't see the console version getting the same amount of updates TW1 and 2 got for free. Hopefully it doesn't affect their DLC policies on the PC.
That's stating the obvious, Saints Row 2 PC is still better than the 360 version. They did switch focus to consoles midway through the development cycle though. PC stopped being the lead platform at a certain point.
So console owners, "Pay more get less"? I did not play the PC version but how much of the original free DLC was packed in with "EE" version of the game on 360?
It's not better just because it's higher resolution like most PC ports. It's still one of the best looking PC multiplayer games, and it's totally different from a gameplay perspective.