• 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.

Witcher 3: Official Gameplay Trailer

RfLZmH2.jpg


Triple Triad exiles paradise? Press
PS-Squ.png
to duel?
Are there any details to how the card game works? I hope its like hearthstone
 

Fitts

Member
So much about this game looks cool. And then I see the combat and my interest wavers. I don't know what it is exactly. Perhaps it's the overdone animations, but it looks so clunky and unresponsive. It doesn't instill confidence that combat footage is so scarce compared to traversal/etc either.

I've never played a Witcher game before and really feel the need to get hands-on with this one before making a buying decision. Someone please set me straight.

Edit: posts like the one below indicate my fears aren't entirely unfounded.
 
All that open world, fantasy, questing, let's go to a tavern and drink ale shit looks cool. I have the inner geek in my like everyone else and I love that stuff.

But I hope to god these guys played Dragon's Dogma and learned what a good, challenging combat system is. I played the Witcher 2 for a bit and realized the combat wasn't good and stopped playing. See, they can keep adding potions, items, stats, gear - but none of that means anything if the combat doesn't feel satisfying, deep and balanced. It's just extra added bullshit in an attempt to cover up what is just not satisfying gameplay. It's the problem I had with Skyrim. And I don't know why these games get a 'free' pass. Just cus, they got open worlds? These guys need to think about start up frames, recovery frames, why animate this move - what's the point? How does this attack differentiate from other? If we're going to give the player these spells and tactics, let's create combat scenarios in which the player needs to think and use them. Let's just not give them the ability to lay traps, cus like - fuck it. It's a bullet point in a marketing trailer. Actually THINK about combat design.

If the gameplay is actually good (actual gameplay, not shit like playing fucking cards in a pub) this will be game of the forever.
 

93xfan

Banned
Its really awesome how your actions on liberating areas might turn up in towns. I hope its just not as simple as that and they go even deeper. The world reacting to your actions sounds like a big replay value.

Game is looking great. Does it say what this is running on?

I have a feeling it's not dynamic at all and just happens when you complete a mission or enough missions. I wouldn't mind being wrong though.
 
I played it on the Xbox one for the early preview couple month ago and based on that trailer, I can't tell any difference in graphic quality so I don't think any system should worry. Seriously the game is fcking sick!
 

RoKKeR

Member
I played it on the Xbox one for the early preview couple month ago and based on that trailer, I can't tell any difference in graphic quality so I don't think any system should worry. Seriously the game is fcking sick!

Um, seriously? That's pretty great if true.
 
From CDProjekt

1 - Yes monsters can be lured into villages or towns, but it is hard. Most creatures are smart enough to know they are in danger the more humans are around, so they avoid large settlements, towns & cities. Still, it can be done. However, townsfolk don't have to stand there and get killed. They are also smart enough to fight back or, more likely, run indoors and hide.

2 - As mentioned, yes, animals and monsters can attack each other. And random NPCs can and will attack or be attacked by monsters/creatures depending on the situation. One lone farmer walking down the road could be set upon by 2 - 3 wolves. He would likely try to run, but would probably become wolf dinner. A squad from the army would likely not get attacked in the same situation as the wolves are too smart to throw away their lives. And there is also the day/night cycle and location to be considered. Some creatures are more powerful at night or drowners are more likely near water, etc. Overall though, this is a living world and it interacts with itself as well as with you.

They already mentioned before that e.g. the bodies of killed humans can attract monsters such as ghouls to the area as an example of a dynamic and living world. Not sure how the repopulation system works though.
 

emrober5

Member
This looks pretty amazing, but as someone with a weak ass pc I'm going to wait for the verdict on the ps4 version before I pick it up.

I think the delay will end up helping this game. Dragon Age has come and gone, and it's out a solid month before Batman.
 
People wanting everything to be Dragon's Dogma are getting more irritating than people that want everything to be Dark Souls.

No, I think we are all getting tired of seeing these open world RPG games like Skyrim and the Witcher 1/2 having brain dead enemy A.I with terrible combat animations and no gameplay balance or challenge when designing character combat. They are more concerned with putting more shit in to quantify combat like added more stats, weapons and armor gear, but not actually making the combat itself better both in terms of substance and presentation. But we got beard physics and plant collecting, so that's great...

I'm only saying this because if it pulls through and the game does have great gameplay the experience should be unrivaled. I hope for the best.

Also, as for Dragon's Dogma, it had terrific combat but it's world was flat as was it's characters and story. It's almost like if DD and TW merged we'd get the ultimate game...
 

erawsd

Member
Are there any details to how the card game works? I hope its like hearthstone

This is the only info I've ever seen on it (credit:
pinoko on official forums)

-Card game of the turn system performed in 1to1. Player have to anticipate 2 rounds first to win the game.
-When a game starts, both players pull 10 cards from deck (2 can be exchanged for other cards).
-Each number written on the upper left determine the value of the card. All cards are categorized into 3 elements, which means "Direct Attack", "Indirect Attack" and "Castle Attack".
-Also Gwent consists of 200 varied cards that is divided into 4 powers, which is Nilfgaard, Northern Realm, Wild Hunt and Scoia'tael (each power consists of 50 cards).
-Once a game starts, player cannot pull more cards from deck, which means if you use 7 cards at first round, you have to deal with only 3 cards rest of the rounds.
-Every turn, player share each 1 card at the place and compete for the sum of the figure written on the card upper left.
-The card taken out at the place once can't be used after the next. Also it's possible for a player to refuse to take out a card.
-Each round is over when both players pass (refusing to take out a card), and the player with the high total numerical value will be a round winner.

Writer said Gwent is simple but deep. Because a card taken out at the place once can't be used after the next, if you use main force cards too much in order to take a first round, you might be lacking in a necessary card next round. Also writer mentioned that there is a special card which have no numbers but have special ability, like "the number of all "Direct Attack" cards is made 1. It's difficult to win the game without thinking by what kind of order a card is taken out or how to utilize a special card etc.
You can buy cards in shops and of course earn cards to compete with NPC. According to article, there are some cards which is absolutely rare, and it seems to be difficult to win NPC who have rare cards.

So much about this game looks cool. And then I see the combat and my interest wavers. I don't know what it is exactly. Perhaps it's the overdone animations, but it looks so clunky and unresponsive. It doesn't instill confidence that combat footage is so scarce compared to traversal/etc either.

I've never played a Witcher game before and really feel the need to get hands-on with this one before making a buying decision. Someone please set me straight.

Well, there is definitely plenty of combat video out there. All the long form demos feature combat sections. I do think they've done a poor job of showing it off by always playing with an overleveled/god mode character.

Im not sure how you judge responsiveness by looking at a video but based on press impressions it doesnt sound like that is at all an issue. In term of it being clunky, I can see it at times too. However, even the Souls games look clunky as hell in videos, especially when theyre played by bad players who are whiffing and dodging poorly.
 

Savitar

Member
Well, if you've read the books:

Triss is actually the other woman. Yennefer was always Geralt's one true love. This didn't stop the two of them from sleeping with other people, even though by all accounts they were both hurt by it.

I'm actually looking forward to the cat fight between Yen and Triss when they meet, considering that Geralt hooked up with Triss frequently while he was suffering from amnesia.

Yennefer already was a little spiteful towards Triss for sleeping with Geralt (as they had been good friends years before Yennefer and Geralt met). It'll be interesting to see how the amnesia part plays into it as well as the fact that their relationship could get pretty serious depending on the players' actions in TW1 and TW2.

Basically this:

kQJ50Pi.gif

If they had a real fight I don't believe it would last too long. Yennefer was suppose to have been even more capable than Triss. In the last English novel to come out Yen basically makes Triss scurry off in a hurry during a party the three are at.
 

jtar86

Member
Already have this game paid for on psn, so ready. I thought the Witcher 2's combat was fine. I never liked dragon's dogma combat though. It always felt so clunky and goofy.
 

SaberEdge

Member
It literally is the best looking open world game ever. It can hang among the best looking games overall. Really don't know what else it can do to impress.

A couple guys here keep trying desperately to downplay this game, but it's just comical. Please, show us a better looking open world game, guys. Because I have AC Unity maxed on PC and Infamous Second Son on PS4 and those are pretty much the best there is at the moment and neither of them look as good as The Witcher 3.
 

Fitts

Member
Im not sure how you judge responsiveness by looking at a video but based on press impressions it doesnt sound like that is at all an issue. In term of it being clunky, I can see it at times too. However, even the Souls games look clunky as hell in videos, especially when theyre played by bad players who are whiffing and dodging poorly.

I cited my concerns: the animations. They look like they take the EA sports (Madden, etc) approach of overdoing it and making the player feel locked in to an action for an excessive period before allowing follow up inputs and with minimal visual cueing as to what those input windows are. I also have yet to see anything that would indicate a development emphasis on enemy AI. (if you know of a video where this is shown I would love to watch it) Again, I would obviously need to get my hands on the game to draw any conclusions. I could care less about press impressions.

As for the Souls games I couldn't disagree more. Bad players just look like bad players. Then again, I've played the shit out of them my perception is probably skewed.
 
If they had a real fight I don't believe it would last too long. Yennefer was suppose to have been even more capable than Triss. In the last English novel to come out Yen basically makes Triss scurry off in a hurry during a party the three are at.
But Yen also had amnesia, we'll see how that turns out.
 

Vire

Member
Finally was able to download the Gamersyde version on my laptop at home and holy poopoo, this game looks phenomenal. I'm usually a pretty hard cookie to please and I don't have any prior experience with the Witcher series in the past, but just wow.

I really don't want to think about all of the sleepless nights that happened to make this game a reality. Just superb ambition for the team size.

The half naked chick on the unicorn made me laugh though, did we really need that?...
 

RedSwirl

Junior Member
Based on the video, I get the impression that this game is standalone from Witcher 1 and 2. Even though you play as Gerault, it doesn't seem like there's any real storyline. Seems like the game is Monster Hunter in the world of Witcher.

Which does make me wonder whether they could have made the playable character customizable from an avatar perspective. Oh well, looks good and I have it preordered...

Nah. Main story is very personal to Geralt. That child of destiny the trailer talks about is
his protege, and the chick from the unicorn shot is a love interest he's been searching for ever since the game series began.

First good current gen game?

Signs point to yes.

I've always been imagining Witcher 3 as my first really significant current-gen game. My absolute deadline for either getting a PS4 or upgrading my PC has always been the release date of this game.
 

Damerman

Member
Looks ok. Not as amazing as people think it is.

please....show me what the fuck looks better.... please. (if you post drive club, don't let the door hit you on the way out.)

I watched the video twice in utter disbelief. the wind blowing on the greenery... the sharpness of the textures and the draw distance... this is unbelievable. this has to be max settings.
 
I cited my concerns: the animations. They look like they take the EA sports (Madden, etc) approach of overdoing it and making the player feel locked in to an action for an excessive period before allowing follow up inputs and with minimal visual cueing as to what those input windows are.
According to a recent interview, that EA Sports approach you mention actually was their approach to Witcher 2. They changed their approach in Witcher 3 to "we need a move here that lasts x long. What attack can be done in that amount of time?". And you can also cancel out of moves with dodge last I heard.
 
This is the only info I've ever seen on it (credit:
pinoko on official forums)

-Card game of the turn system performed in 1to1. Player have to anticipate 2 rounds first to win the game.
-When a game starts, both players pull 10 cards from deck (2 can be exchanged for other cards).
-Each number written on the upper left determine the value of the card. All cards are categorized into 3 elements, which means "Direct Attack", "Indirect Attack" and "Castle Attack".
-Also Gwent consists of 200 varied cards that is divided into 4 powers, which is Nilfgaard, Northern Realm, Wild Hunt and Scoia'tael (each power consists of 50 cards).
-Once a game starts, player cannot pull more cards from deck, which means if you use 7 cards at first round, you have to deal with only 3 cards rest of the rounds.
-Every turn, player share each 1 card at the place and compete for the sum of the figure written on the card upper left.
-The card taken out at the place once can't be used after the next. Also it's possible for a player to refuse to take out a card.
-Each round is over when both players pass (refusing to take out a card), and the player with the high total numerical value will be a round winner.

Writer said Gwent is simple but deep. Because a card taken out at the place once can't be used after the next, if you use main force cards too much in order to take a first round, you might be lacking in a necessary card next round. Also writer mentioned that there is a special card which have no numbers but have special ability, like "the number of all "Direct Attack" cards is made 1. It's difficult to win the game without thinking by what kind of order a card is taken out or how to utilize a special card etc.
You can buy cards in shops and of course earn cards to compete with NPC. According to article, there are some cards which is absolutely rare, and it seems to be difficult to win NPC who have rare cards.
Thanks for finding this, seems way better than dice poker :)
 

Damerman

Member
I cited my concerns: the animations. They look like they take the EA sports (Madden, etc) approach of overdoing it and making the player feel locked in to an action for an excessive period before allowing follow up inputs and with minimal visual cueing as to what those input windows are. I also have yet to see anything that would indicate a development emphasis on enemy AI. (if you know of a video where this is shown I would love to watch it) Again, I would obviously need to get my hands on the game to draw any conclusions. I could care less about press impressions.

As for the Souls games I couldn't disagree more. Bad players just look like bad players. Then again, I've played the shit out of them my perception is probably skewed.

well to be honest the issue that you are talking about was the problem with the witcher 2's combat system. In the witcher 3(in one of the game informer coverage videos) the combat animator made sure to address this.

If anything, i take issue with how quickly geralt seems to move in the gameplay videos i've seen.
 

Vire

Member
Will there be an option for the removal of HUD in this game? The trailer clearly removes the HUD and I think it makes all the difference in the world for immersion.
 
my PC destroys a PS4 (R9 290, 8GB, i7 4790), but I'm still gonna wait and see what that version looks like before I decide. Sometimes optimizing for one platform can pull off odd little miracles.
 
please....show me what the fuck looks better.... please. (if you post drive club, don't let the door hit you on the way out.)

The only thing that looks better than The Witcher 3 is.... older Witcher 3 footage :p

In all seriousness, for an open world game, it does look great. I don't see it pushing any boundaries like the next iteration of CryEngine or anything. It just strikes a nice balance between graphical fidelity and art direction.

One could argue that AC: Unity looks better up to about 30 meters, but that game would completely fall apart with the view distances that TW3 has to contend with.

Will there be an option for the removal of HUD in this game?

Yep!
 

RedSwirl

Junior Member
From CDProjekt



They already mentioned before that e.g. the bodies of killed humans can attract monsters such as ghouls to the area as an example of a dynamic and living world. Not sure how the repopulation system works though.

So I imagine lone humans are smart enough not to venture out of town at night. This also raises the question of whether certain monsters might stay away from you if you'r above a certain level. Maybe you're strong enough to one-shot a certain enemy, and the rest in the group decide to flee.

No, I think we are all getting tired of seeing these open world RPG games like Skyrim and the Witcher 1/2 having brain dead enemy A.I with terrible combat animations and no gameplay balance or challenge when designing character combat. They are more concerned with putting more shit in to quantify combat like added more stats, weapons and armor gear, but not actually making the combat itself better both in terms of substance and presentation. But we got beard physics and plant collecting, so that's great...

I'm only saying this because if it pulls through and the game does have great gameplay the experience should be unrivaled. I hope for the best.

Also, as for Dragon's Dogma, it had terrific combat but it's world was flat as was it's characters and story. It's almost like if DD and TW merged we'd get the ultimate game...

The real general problem here is: western developers still aren't that great at melee combat. The Batman system is the best they've been able to do recently, which works under completely different principles from traditional action games.

And I don't think any RPG developer is going to be able to top the combat of Dragon's Dogma, which was made by the Devil May Cry team.
 

PFD

Member
People wanting everything to be Dragon's Dogma are getting more irritating than people that want everything to be Dark Souls.

Seriously. And Dragon's Dogma's combat doesn't fit the Witcher at all, especially the animation freeze with every hit.
 
Welp... I think I'll upgrade my PC for this game. It's time to have a decent graphics card for once in my life.

My wild hunt has now begun.
 

Fitts

Member
According to a recent interview, that EA Sports approach you mention actually was their approach to Witcher 2. They changed their approach in Witcher 3 to "we need a move here that lasts x long. What attack can be done in that amount of time?". And you can also cancel out of moves with dodge last I heard.

Ha, no kidding? So maybe what I'm seeing is the devs attempting to play it in a scripted fashion? If they made a conscious effort to make combat responsive and free flowing then good on them.
 
Top Bottom