yeah that somehow attracted over 150.000 wievs for a single bad trailer in less than two days.
Well, it's late as hell here so I'm turning in for the night.
I want to thank everyone for their replies and opinions. I appreciate them all, so thanks for taking the time!
It got kind of edgy, but in the end I only wanted to state my opinion and have others do the same.
Good luck to CDPR, and the rest of you. I hope the game has a great release!
I want to thank everyone for their replies and opinions. I appreciate them all, so thanks for taking the time!
It got kind of edgy, but in the end I only wanted to state my opinion and have others do the same.
Good luck to CDPR, and the rest of you. I hope the game has a great release!
Valve used to be one of my favorite game developers but lately they have become rather anti-consumer by selling unfinished games on Steam. I don't want CD Projekt to become like them.
I don't really get this. I mean, the jokes.....
I don't think it's possible and probably the worst idea to make an early access, because this game has no DRM and is focused on quality of the final product, in addition the game was delayed directly making it now wouldn't make sense.
It simply is not possible. But the question is fair and acceptable.
I don't think it's possible and probably the worst idea to make an early access, because this game has no DRM and is focused on quality of the final product, in addition the game was delayed directly making it now wouldn't make sense.
It simply is not possible. But the question is fair and acceptable.
I agree, the story would be revealed but overall it would feel uncomplete
I'm gonna have to vote no, no thanks, furthermore hell no, and also NO.
If the last few years have taught me anything, it's that the biggest mistake a game developer can make is to release pretty much any kind of advance material of a game that's not 100% finished. There are dozens of ways this can backfire, and I don't see what there's really to be gained from it, for CDPR or for us.
That said, if they have a small area of the game that's functional and that would work for a demo, and that is sure to be representative of the final graphical fidelity, it would be nice if they could put out a demo. Not that the games have much of anything in common, but Sony Santa Monica did this way back when with God of War 3 - a handful of sequences from the game where put together as a demo, a LONG time before release, it worked, and it looked just like the final product. Maybe that's doable, but in all honesty, I doubt it. And at this point, anything with the potential to blow up the internet with another ComplainGasm™ is best avoided like the plague. Sadly, even this community isn't immune to it.
If the last few years have taught me anything, it's that the biggest mistake a game developer can make is to release pretty much any kind of advance material of a game that's not 100% finished. There are dozens of ways this can backfire, and I don't see what there's really to be gained from it, for CDPR or for us.
That said, if they have a small area of the game that's functional and that would work for a demo, and that is sure to be representative of the final graphical fidelity, it would be nice if they could put out a demo. Not that the games have much of anything in common, but Sony Santa Monica did this way back when with God of War 3 - a handful of sequences from the game where put together as a demo, a LONG time before release, it worked, and it looked just like the final product. Maybe that's doable, but in all honesty, I doubt it. And at this point, anything with the potential to blow up the internet with another ComplainGasm™ is best avoided like the plague. Sadly, even this community isn't immune to it.
Last edited:
I have to wonder where exactly you learnt that fact; tell me, how is it the biggest mistake a gamedev can make?
After all, it's not hard to find a successful Early Access game, which shows how that notion is just a generalization.
We can't discuss what CDPR can or can not gain from it either, since it would require access to data we don't have, namely the current state of the game, internal company politics, and other factors I am surely missing.
But then again, we can't know that for sure. All I've seen here is spades and spades of misunderstanding; or lack understanding altogether regarding the purpose of the Early Access practice, and it shows in a lot of posts.
An Early Access' purpose is far from presenting a finished, or near-finished representation of the project.
It doesn't betray the understanding of the "software development ideal", if there ever was one, which would still be a subjective ideology among many others.
The quality of the final product is what's important, and it shouldn't even be affected if done properly, as it doesn't conflict with the development process itself, all studios create early builds one way or another.
There's just this weird misconception based around the idea in which a completely optional, bonus, access to a form of the developer's internal build somehow shows less... care or dedication to the project itself... and in turn somehow magically degrades it's final quality?
Or then there's the idea that will somehow spoil the game for the people that want no part in it?
Right, no. Like I said, it's an option.
The reason I think Early Access wouldn't be feasible for CDPR is simply that it seems most of the community is against it. Whether the majority of the community understands the concept or not, if they take a stance, the company will probably stand with them.
But then the problem would not be the practice of Early Access; it's the users that refuse to or can't understand the purpose of that particular practice, thus forcing the developer to take the road that pleases most of it's clients.
It's a business decision, and a very intelligent one at that, knowing who your clients are.
What I am defending here is not the idea of Early Access for the Witcher. I'm trying to show how the concept itself is not immediately evil, or counterproductive.
Last edited:
I think it's generally a bad idea for Triple-A games to do Early Access. They have a particular audience which certain limitations and expectations. It is very, very likely that the idea behind Early Access would be missed/misunderstood by a large part of said target group, resulting in a marketing disaster.
While some people might disagree with me the average person buying TW3 will by and large not be very different compared to AC:U or Watch_Dogs buyers. There's certainly a fan community that might(!) understand and accept the intent behind Early Access, but the larger part of this games target audience would just read: "Its there! BUY IT!", do exactly that and start a shitstorm mere minutes later after running into several game breaking bugs: "It's unplayable! CDProject is worse than Ubisoft! Never pre-order again!" completely and utterly missing the 'Early Access'-tag.
Early Access is a great concept for niche games with a slightly more 'nerdy' or 'hardcore' target audience, resulting in:
a) having fun to help the developer
b) understanding the idea and concept behind Early Access
c) appreciating the possibility to be a part of the development process
There have been quite a few successful examples (e.g. Divinity: Original Sin, ARMA 3, Minecraft ...) and they all meet above requirements. Releasing a Triple-A game as Early Access would result in an utter disaster, because, as said previously, the expectations, limitations and overall attributes of the respective target audiences are very different and, in the case of Triple-A games, not geared towards an Early Access approach.
In the end the question should not be: "Is Early Access a decent and potentially successful concept?" but "Does our target audience understand, support and agree with the concept of Early Access?". You could do all the explaining in the world, it does not solve everything. Sorry if that shakes your believe in the fundamentally good nature of humans, but simply explaining something does not guarantee understanding and approval.
While some people might disagree with me the average person buying TW3 will by and large not be very different compared to AC:U or Watch_Dogs buyers. There's certainly a fan community that might(!) understand and accept the intent behind Early Access, but the larger part of this games target audience would just read: "Its there! BUY IT!", do exactly that and start a shitstorm mere minutes later after running into several game breaking bugs: "It's unplayable! CDProject is worse than Ubisoft! Never pre-order again!" completely and utterly missing the 'Early Access'-tag.
Early Access is a great concept for niche games with a slightly more 'nerdy' or 'hardcore' target audience, resulting in:
a) having fun to help the developer
b) understanding the idea and concept behind Early Access
c) appreciating the possibility to be a part of the development process
There have been quite a few successful examples (e.g. Divinity: Original Sin, ARMA 3, Minecraft ...) and they all meet above requirements. Releasing a Triple-A game as Early Access would result in an utter disaster, because, as said previously, the expectations, limitations and overall attributes of the respective target audiences are very different and, in the case of Triple-A games, not geared towards an Early Access approach.
In the end the question should not be: "Is Early Access a decent and potentially successful concept?" but "Does our target audience understand, support and agree with the concept of Early Access?". You could do all the explaining in the world, it does not solve everything. Sorry if that shakes your believe in the fundamentally good nature of humans, but simply explaining something does not guarantee understanding and approval.
Last edited:
I actually don't believe in humans too much. Just the humans that can reason. Part of that is being able to understand a simple concept. You don't have to be indie, or obscure to get a decent following.
Minecraft was everything but finished when it got popular. I wouldn't call that an indie market full of intellectuals, just an indie game.
And well, you state that "Triple-A" games are not geared towards Early Access as fact.
Why? Because the target audience is too stupid to understand a few written sentences?
That's over-generalization, in my opinion. It just hasn't been done yet, which doesn't disprove anything about it working for Triple-A, it's just a risk that you either take, or you don't, based on other factors.
"Triple-A" does NOT mean "Casual". My grandmother won't play Triple-A games on her cellphone. ( Or maybe she will! )
And also as a note, "Triple-A" just means that the game has a high budget, if you want to say it implies much else, look at Star Citizen. That's "Triple-A"
And come on, nerdy or hardcore audience? I didn't know the standards dropped so readily during the years, that now people with the amazing ability to successfully read and comprehend a sentence ought to be labeled something other than "normal".
Did you read my reply?
If you read my reply, you can see that I'm countering THIS argument of, "Early Access/Unfinished games are crap, for all game developers". Which is completely baseless.
I already established it wouldn't work for Witcher 3 due to what the community believes.
And yeah I agree, the audience plays an important role.
Just as a disclaimer though, I read this again and it kinda sounds like I'm being aggressive, so I apologize for that!
It's just my writing style, this is not a contest and I don't think there's anything to be won by debating, other that being able to reach a conclusion.
So yeah, thanks for your reply.
Last edited: