Support NeoGAF

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

-snip-

PC gaming is a niche market because no developer wants to commit AAA games to it without consoles? Or you know, PC is just one platform?

My point was, games aren't made with a "PC first" in mind. It's the platform that is included, though being the lead platform used to make the game. AAA games that are made are meant to appeal and sell to console gamers first.

However, there are PC games that are made for the PC crowd which are entirely meant for that platform, such as Dota's and Star Citizens, etc.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

You ungrateful bastards...

Spoiler

I'm talking about CDPR not PC gamers. Console sales were made possible because of PC gamers.

lol? If they decided to bring their sequels to TW1 to consoles it's probably because PC sales weren't enough, doncha think?

Also:

That's basically admitting they butchered the rendering engine for parity with consoles.

Dat salt

I bet piracy has a lot to do with it. I know nobody wants to talk about it on here because we are all loyal customers who loves their games and buy them to support the devs. But if you see the breakdowns from time to time when a publisher or dev gives out hard numbers, it's often not unusual that over half of the downloads of a game comes from torrent and co. And this is a problem mostly PC related. So no wonder that many devs and publishers jump over to consoles.

I don't know if piracy has "a lot" to do with it, because that's hard to calculate, but I wonder if Steam sales do? I've seen TW2 Enhanced Edition go for ludicrously cheap during some Steam sales (like $3-4) and that was when the game wasn't that old. So there's not only the fact that PC gamers capable of running a demanding game like TW3 are fairly few (those high-end graphic cards are expensive after all), but I bet many of the PC sales come at hugely reduced markups because many people choose to wait a year or two instead of buying at full price. It'd be small wonder, then, that they'd rely on console sales to bring in the money.

[Edit: just in case I'm misunderstood, I'm not directly comparing purchasers of Steam sales to pirates or equating them morally, of course. ^^ But, well, I bought Fallout NV for $2 last winter and I know I didn't contribute much to the sales revenue, heh.]

 

[Kalnos]

I don't know if piracy has "a lot" to do with it, because that's hard to calculate, but I wonder if Steam sales do? I've seen TW2 Enhanced Edition go for ludicrously cheap during some Steam sales (like $3-4) and that was when the game wasn't that old. So there's not only the fact that PC gamers capable of running a demanding game like TW3 are fairly few (those high-end graphic cards are expensive after all), but I bet many of the PC sales come at hugely reduced markups because many people choose to wait a year or two instead of buying at full price. It'd be small wonder, then, that they'd rely on console sales to bring in the money.

Some people wait for Steam sales, some people wait to buy the game used, I don't see a huge difference honestly other than the fact that CDPR still gets something from the Steam sale.

Sounds to me like some form of the game would have been made either way, it's just that they wouldn't have had the same scope without making the game for an expanded audience.

 

[AndrewDean84xX]

I'm thankful that CDPR made the game they did, thanks to developing the game as a multiplatform title. Even if it upsets the few that want something that they should have known wasn't gonna happen.

I mean, are the same people here upset by the downgrade still think The Division will look like it's gameplay debut video? That shit is common practice these days.

It's like people don't care what something is, and focus on what something isn't.

 

[Kintaro]

I mean, are the same people here upset by the downgrade still think The Division will look like it's gameplay debut video? That shit is common practice these days.

It's like people don't care what something is, and focus on what something isn't.

Can't get upset when Ubisoft does it. It's expected. So, I never buy those games until they have to basically give them to me. CDPR doing it? That was unexpected. And just as shitty.

It's like people can't wrap their heads around this or something.

People do care what something is. Especially when that something is different from what you were being told it is.

 

[AndrewDean84xX]

Pc gamer darling one minute. Ubisoft another. Rough.

 

[……forgetit]

It wasn't licensing. It was handed out to an external porting house, which delayed and delayed and then finally admitted that they couldn't get it to work. This singular event nearly bankrupted the studio.

Oh, thanks. I was curious about it and everything I found was kinda vague.

 

[Tigress]

Some people wait for Steam sales, some people wait to buy the game used, I don't see a huge difference honestly other than the fact that CDPR still gets something from the Steam sale.

Sounds to me like some form of the game would have been made either way, it's just that they wouldn't have had the same scope without making the game for an expanded audience.

You know, if we are going to do the "But it would have been made just not as big" thing, I'll just say it. I will easily pick the game that they did make with the large scope and open world and maybe not as impressive graphics rather than compromise the large open world and have something more like Witcher 2 but prettier graphics cause they don't have to compromise for console (but also aren't getting the money either). In fact, if it was more like Witcher 2, as much as I would wish CDPR good luck, I wouldn't be interested (not for 60 bux anyways so if I did decide I want to play it I'd wait til I could get it cheap used).

I will easily take the much larger world and more exploration and not have the graphics impress me so much (but they are still pretty) over a small, limited world that pretends to be open world but is limited enough it still doesn't feel that open. I like pretty graphics in my game, but they'll only take you so far. In general graphics have gotten good enough that I'd rather they more focus on the rest of the game rather than trying to make the graphics as pretty as possible at the compromise of the rest of the game.

To be fair I also wouldn't be able to play Witcher III if it was PC only but I honestly would not be so interested (Witcher 2 was ok but sorry, it didn't give me that addicted/must play feel. It was more like, "YEah, it's good. I'm kinda glad it wasn't too long though." Witcher III so far has me addicted and wanting to keep playing it).

 

[Kinthalis]

My point was, games aren't made with a "PC first" in mind. It's the platform that is included, though being the lead platform used to make the game. AAA games that are made are meant to appeal and sell to console gamers first.

However, there are PC games that are made for the PC crowd which are entirely meant for that platform, such as Dota's and Star Citizens, etc.

This is just false. Many AAA games have been made with PC in mind, if not as lead development platform.

 

[draetenth]

Eh, I'm only interested if the game is good. I don't care what platform it is on as long as it runs well on a pc (and preferably works with a mouse + kb). I'm fine with the Witcher 3 as is, but I also probably would have been fine if it was PC only with a limited scope (if we are saying it would have been closer to the Witcher 1 + 2).

 

[texhnolyze]

I honestly have no problem with this and happy with the outcome.
The game is amazing & magical as it is. I won't be able to experience it if it's PC exclusive otherwise.

 

[……forgetit]

Eh, I'm only interested if the game is good. I don't care what platform it is on as long as it runs well on a pc (and preferably works with a mouse + kb). I'm fine with the Witcher 3 as is, but I also probably would have been fine if it was PC only with a limited scope (if we are saying it would have been closer to the Witcher 1 + 2).

It wouldn't be the game it is now With a limited scope though. I'd prefer a great game as it is now and actually being able to play it over pretty graphics and never being able to play it.

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

I've never touched a Witcher game, but seeing situations like this pisses me off. So much rage and overreactions to something that will be forgotten about in a few weeks.

How, in 2015, are we still getting upset over a practice that's been happening for 20 years? This wasn't even remotely the worst case of it either. Some people need to get something more to balance their lives out with. To get that upset over the graphics of a game? I did that shit when I was 14 years old.

 

[Poimandres]

Good interview, nice and honest with plenty of insight.

Really though, if this kind of interview came out before the game released there wouldn't have been a big deal made about the downgrade. Changes happen, some systems don't work out for whatever reason etc. I can understand why devs don't talk out about this stuff before release (bad PR) but that kind of honesty would help them in the long run.

 

[Krappadizzle]

In regards to this interview, I wish they had come out with all this when the downgrade train started up. They've always been so upfront and open in the past it seemed uncharacteristic of them to be so quiet on the whole thing. Makes more sense now, they wanted to wait till people bought it before they learned about them lying.

I love this game, I think it'll be one of the best games of this entire generation, but it does not excuse the fact that CDPR blatantly and flat-out lied to people, then changed their mind after they released the game and decided to come clean. DO BETTER CDPR. I love you guys, and you guys are acting like ubi-EA and it makes me sad. CDPR makes some of the best RPG's around and are generally thought of as pro-consumer, but their lying put a big apostrophe mark on how I feel about them. Don't do that again.

You know, if we are going to do the "But it would have been made just not as big" thing, I'll just say it. I will easily pick the game that they did make with the large scope and open world and maybe not as impressive graphics rather than compromise the large open world and have something more like Witcher 2 but prettier graphics cause they don't have to compromise for console (but also aren't getting the money either). In fact, if it was more like Witcher 2, as much as I would wish CDPR good luck, I wouldn't be interested (not for 60 bux anyways so if I did decide I want to play it I'd wait til I could get it cheap used).

I will easily take the much larger world and more exploration and not have the graphics impress me so much (but they are still pretty) over a small, limited world that pretends to be open world but is limited enough it still doesn't feel that open. I like pretty graphics in my game, but they'll only take you so far. In general graphics have gotten good enough that I'd rather they more focus on the rest of the game rather than trying to make the graphics as pretty as possible at the compromise of the rest of the game.

To be fair I also wouldn't be able to play Witcher III if it was PC only but I honestly would not be so interested (Witcher 2 was ok but sorry, it didn't give me that addicted/must play feel. It was more like, "YEah, it's good. I'm kinda glad it wasn't too long though." Witcher III so far has me addicted and wanting to keep playing it).

I agree with your sentiment, but damn if it isn't weird to hear you compare the game that is here with the theoretical game that doesn't exist. I'd rather them released on PC first like Witcher 2 and then scale back for consoles, like Witcher 2. But if they say the game wouldn't have been made otherwise, I'll take what I can get from them. They make the best RPG's around.

 

[DR2K]

In regards to this interview, I wish they had come out with all this when the downgrade train started up. They've always been so upfront and open in the past it seemed uncharacteristic of them to be so quiet on the whole thing. Makes more sense now, they wanted to wait till people bought it before they learned about them lying.

I love this game, I think it'll be one of the best games of this entire generation, but it does not excuse the fact that CDPR blatantly and flat-out lied to people, then changed their mind after they released the game and decided to come clean. DO BETTER CDPR. I love you guys, and you guys are acting like ubi-EA and it makes me sad. Don't do that again.

It was made known before the game went on sale (officially)from various sources that the game received a few downgrades. No one was lied to or misled. You still got the best looking open world game to date.

They were up front about it pretty early on sales wise for what it's worth, but the knowledge was out there prior to day 1.

 

[AyaisMUsikWhore]

This is just false. Many AAA games have been made with PC in mind, if not as lead development platform.

Any example of current popular AAA games that proves this right? Note, I'm not saying your wrong but I've known for years that majority of the major AAA games and franchises that are very popular today are heavily console influenced versus PC.

Off the top of my head, just guessing, I do understand games like Portal and Elder Scrolls are games where the PC is definitely the lead platform.... I don't think the same can be said for games like GTA and Bioshock etc etc..

 

[Lactose_Intolerant]

Any example of current popular AAA games that proves this right? Note, I'm not saying your wrong but I've known for years that majority of the major AAA games and franchises that are very popular today are heavily console influenced versus PC.

Off the top of my head, just guessing, I do understand games like Portal and Elder Scrolls are games where the PC is definitely the lead platform.... I don't think the same can be said for games like GTA and Bioshock etc etc..

Diablo 3

 

[4Tran]

Diablo 3

There are a bunch of PC-only games that should count as AAA as well: Total War, Starcraft, DOTA 2, League of Legends, and so on.

For multiplatform titles, I can definitely see games that have strong PC roots use the PC as the lead platform. This would include games like Wolfenstein: New Order and Planetside 2.

 

[Tigress]

Off the top of my head, just guessing, I do understand games like Portal and Elder Scrolls are games where the PC is definitely the lead platform.... I don't think the same can be said for games like GTA and Bioshock etc etc..

And even then with Skyrim there was/is a lot of talk about it being dumbed down to sell better on consoles.

 

[Corvo Jensen]

Good interview, nice and honest with plenty of insight.

Really though, if this kind of interview came out before the game released there wouldn't have been a big deal made about the downgrade. Changes happen, some systems don't work out for whatever reason etc. I can understand why devs don't talk out about this stuff before release (bad PR) but that kind of honesty would help them in the long run.

yeah that's basically the whole reason why people are pissed off. compromises are bound to happen, but transparency (which cdpr is usually known for) wasn't really the case here.

 

[Spirited]

And even then with Skyrim there was/is a lot of talk about it being dumbed down to sell better on consoles.

It was dumbed down, you just have to take a quick look at the UI to understand what was the lead platform.

 

[Mastperf]

And even then with Skyrim there was/is a lot of talk about it being dumbed down to sell better on consoles.

I'm pretty sure the 360 was the lead platform for Skyrim.

 

[Red Hood]

It was dumbed down, you just have to take a quick look at the UI to understand what was the lead platform.

When I think of dumbing down, I think of a complete overhaul of gameplay and mechanics that were present in prior games. I'd like to think that the vanilla UI was just... console friendly, and not something too extreme like dumbing down.

But I suppose that's another discussion on its own, otherwise we might derail the thread.

 

[Sijil]

When I think of dumbing down, I think of a complete overhaul of gameplay and mechanics that were present in prior games. I'd like to think that the vanilla UI was just... console friendly, and not something too extreme like dumbing down.

But I suppose that's another discussion on its own, otherwise we might derail the thread.

Other than the UI Skyrim lost a lot of complicated mechanics, dice rolls to hit, classes, etc... Turned it way too mainstream in comparison to Morrowind.

 

[kraspkibble]

I'll take a graphics downgrade for a bigger game to a bigger audience. The game still looks amazing. Alright maybe not as good as it could be and maybe not a game that will destroy the highest end PC. But it looks great.

 

[VodevilX]

I'll take a graphics downgrade for a bigger game to a bigger audience. The game still looks amazing. Alright maybe not as good as it could be and maybe not a game that will destroy the highest end PC. But it looks great.

Yeah, rather make it not so gpu killer, but multiplatform, than skip PC entirely.

 

[hooijdonk17]

To everyone who keep saying: "If it was a tradeoff between scope and IQ, I'll be happy with scope", why do you even believe CDPR's excuse for the graphical downgrade? They lied about the IQ of the finished product, their precedent isn't one of decency at all.

 

[Vintage]

To everyone who keep saying: "If it was a tradeoff between scope and IQ, I'll be happy with scope", why do you even believe CDPR's excuse for the graphical downgrade? They lied about the IQ of the finished product, their precedent isn't one of decency at all.

How did they lie? The footage of finished product exactly matches the game. Early trailers were not of finished product.
The explanations why they changed stuff are perfectly reasonable. Who should I believe if not the developers themselves?

 

[Velurian]

Any example of current popular AAA games that proves this right? Note, I'm not saying your wrong but I've known for years that majority of the major AAA games and franchises that are very popular today are heavily console influenced versus PC.

Off the top of my head, just guessing, I do understand games like Portal and Elder Scrolls are games where the PC is definitely the lead platform.... I don't think the same can be said for games like GTA and Bioshock etc etc..

The way I see it, is that there is no sense in developing a multiplaform game with PC as the lead platform, because then it will not be a multiplatform game. You need to look at the lowest denominal and that is currently xbox one, so whenever you do make a multiplatform game, that is your base level.

When it comes to Witcher am very sad to see all the fanboy BS here. If it were up to me all games would be multiplatform so everybody could play everything but alas , this is not the state of affairs in today's world. Since CDPR is not a charity the chose to include more markets for their game and I think its wise decision. So as a result they also took into account console level performance that lead to whatever it lead to, but most importantly it lead to a great game we can all enjoy.

So console folk, just be happy and don't turn this into bitchslaping fest and pc folk, get over the downgrade drama queen attitude. Its a good game. CDPR still has us covered.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

I wonder if Steam sales do? I've seen TW2 Enhanced Edition go for ludicrously cheap during some Steam sales (like $3-4) and that was when the game wasn't that old. So there's not only the fact that PC gamers capable of running a demanding game like TW3 are fairly few (those high-end graphic cards are expensive after all), but I bet many of the PC sales come at hugely reduced markups because many people choose to wait a year or two instead of buying at full price. It'd be small wonder, then, that they'd rely on console sales to bring in the money.

[Edit: just in case I'm misunderstood, I'm not directly comparing purchasers of Steam sales to pirates or equating them morally, of course. ^^ But, well, I bought Fallout NV for $2 last winter and I know I didn't contribute much to the sales revenue, heh.]

A game sold on sale on the PC for $3 2 years after release still gives a publisher more than $2.00 per copy sold.
A game sold secondhand at GameStop on console a week after release at any price gives a publisher $0.00 per copy sold.

Its why the Pc has long tail sales and consoles don't.

 

[hooijdonk17]

How did they lie? The footage of finished product exactly matches the game. Early trailers were not of finished product.
The explanations why they changed stuff are perfectly reasonable. Who should I believe if not the developers themselves?

They lied by never again showing Ultra setting videos and insisting that their Ultra settings would look EVEN BETTER than the 2013 VGX trailer.

That was a blatant, inexcusable, incomprehensible lie.

 

[alexandros]

That was a blatant, inexcusable, incomprehensible lie.

Yeah. It wasn't one of CDPR's greatest moments.

 

[Dargor]

A game sold on sale on the PC for $3 2 years after release still gives a publisher more than $2.00 per copy sold.
A game sold secondhand at GameStop on console a week after release at any price gives a publisher $0.00 per copy sold.

Its why the Pc has long tail sales and consoles don't.

You know you are being extremely disingenuous, right? Not only we already have great sales at PSN, as times goes by and they get more and more games to sell, those are only going to get even better.

We already had sales with games going for under U$1,00.

 

[Barzul]

I'm glad this game was made for consoles also. The critical and sales success we've seen improves the chances for a Witcher 4 with even larger scale. Such a great game.

 

[PulseONE]

The way some people in this thread sound, they'd prefer not to get the game at all rather than have the graphics be 'tainted' by consoles.

Because clearly, the game is hideous, right?

 

[Kosma]

They lied by never again showing Ultra setting videos and insisting that their Ultra settings would look EVEN BETTER than the 2013 VGX trailer.

That was a blatant, inexcusable, incomprehensible lie.

Could you provide me with a quote from CDPR where they say that?

I must have missed it.

 

[JehutyGR]

So if consoles are doomed, PCs are doomed too? Got it.

 

[Dargor]

So if consoles are doomed, PCs are doomed too? Got it.

Only in relation to most AAA games.

 

[Randy Monk]

PC only gamers should put money where their mouths are by just buying PC exclusive games only. Don't support developers that sell their games on multi platforms.

That'll learn em....

 

[StevieP]

You know you are being extremely disingenuous, right? Not only we already have great sales at PSN, as times goes by and they get more and more games to sell, those are only going to get even better.

We already had sales with games going for under U$1,00.

Please don't try to compare steam and PSN. THAT is disingenuous

 

[Rathorial]

Well it does just confirm that AAA budgets are to the point where multi-platform development is needed to recoup costs, and manage risk. The downside can be that the games need to run on the lowest powered platform, so how much is added for the higher fidelity platform is dependent on the dev, and the lowest powered system might also barely run the experience with dips below 30fps.

It has been this way since mid-way through last gen, with the only exceptions being games funded by the individual console platform owners, big PC strategy games & Star Citizen.

The important takeaway that stems any fanboy bragging, is that no individual platform is lucrative enough to support AAA now from third-party devs, and third-parties are the majority of the market.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

You know you are being extremely disingenuous, right?

Uhhhhhhhh no?
Implying PC gamers inherently spend less money on games because steam sales exist and all console owners buy their games $60 day one is disingenuous.

 

[maxiell]

I think the blowback they are hearing from their most devoted PC users on this comes from a less cynical place than is being assumed. The industry as a whole does need talented developers to target high end machines. It's not about appealing to a niche or restricting who can play their game.

It is crucial to have studios targeting the highest possible technical limits of what is achievable in order to push the medium forward. The weird thing is, I think there's a financially viable space in the market for that now - see Star Citizen - but few are tapping into it.

 

[Principate]

There are a bunch of PC-only games that should count as AAA as well: Total War, Starcraft, DOTA 2, League of Legends, and so on.

For multiplatform titles, I can definitely see games that have strong PC roots use the PC as the lead platform. This would include games like Wolfenstein: New Order and Planetside 2.

Large amount of games that have the highest revenues in existence are PC exclusive, the issue has always been business models. PC gaming thrives on different business models where as console gaming doesn't. W3 caters to a business model that fits console gaming very well.

 

[Dargor]

Please don't try to compare steam and PSN. THAT is disingenuous

Why? Are Steam sales better than PSN? Of course they are. It has way more time in the market, thus had way more time to perfect the way it offers its services. But PSN already shows that it can get there too. PSN has had some great sales and as time goes by they can only get better.

Why can't I compare it to Steam?

Uhhhhhhhh no?
Implying PC gamers inherently spend less money on games because steam sales exist and all console owners buy their games $60 day one is disingenuous.

You said that pc has long term sales and that consoles don't. Both have long term sales, even the AAA games.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

You said that pc has long term sales and that consoles don't. Both have long term sales, even the AAA games.

PC software sales historically have far longer tails than console software does.
Sorry if that offends your sensibilities. It's true.

 

[Dargor]

PC software sales historically have far longer tails than console software does.
Sorry if that offends your sensibilities. It's true.

When did I get offended? I'm only correcting you. You said that consoles don't have long term sales. Now you said what is true. PCs sales have longer tails.

Thats why I said you were being disingenuous.

 

[MrNyarlathotep]

When did I get offended? I'm only correcting you. You said that consoles don't have long term sales. Now you said what is true. PCs sales have longer tails.

Thats why I said you were being disingenuous.

Its why the Pc has long tail sales and consoles don't.

PC software sales historically have far longer tails than console software does.

???

 

[StevieP]

Why? Are Steam sales better than PSN? Of course they are. It has way more time in the market, thus had way more time to perfect the way it offers its services. But PSN already shows that it can get there too. PSN has had some great sales and as time goes by they can only get better.

Why can't I compare it to Steam?



You said that pc has long term sales and that consoles don't. Both have long term sales, even the AAA games.

steam isn't subsidized by monthly usage fees for a start. There is also a far greater content base