My bet is on Sony, this way CDPR avoids accusations of the sort you mentioned, that they favor one platform over the other. So the smart move would be to go with the other platform this year.
My bet is on Sony, this way CDPR avoids accusations of the sort you mentioned, that they favor one platform over the other. So the smart move would be to go with the other platform this year.
You can make an argument for either way really. You can say Sony to have the game appear at a Sony and MS conference but you can also say that MS would love to have them on again.
They might not have a choice. Sony might not be offering the kind of marketing support that Microsoft is willing to give them. It could be as simple as that.
I do agree though, I would prefer to see them at Sony just so they've done one each & everything looks fair. However at the same time, the people who would claim CDPR have some kind of Microsoft Bias if they did show a second time should really have their opinions disregarded because it's just idiocy.
Hah, threads popped up last year accusing CDPR of MS bias just because they showed the game on the MS stage. So accusations like these will always happen, no matter on which stage they will show the game, simply because some people are proper morons.
My point is that if they do the showing on Sony's stage, there's less fuel for accusations of the type.
Last edited:
Last edited:
I still think CDPR should have their own independent presentation to show the industry how much they've grown.
But since it's not happening, I think CDPR should go with Sony this time because of two reasons:
1. Witcher 3 was on Microsoft's stage last time, and it should be on sony's stage to re-establish CDPR's neutrality.
2. Neither Witcher 1 or 2 were released on Sony's Playstation, but Witcher 2 was released on microsoft's Xbox. So I believe that CDPR should target the Sony audience because they are naturally less familiar with the series, and assure them that they will enjoy the game although they haven't played the previous entries.
3. Sony's going to get more attention this year, because they have big plans for E3 introducing Project Morpheus and Playstation Now, showing off Uncharted 4, revealing at least 3 new IPs, probably showing a demo of the Order 1866, and possibly sequels to other favorite Sony series such as God of War. CDPR would benefit from the attention, if they go with Sony.
But since it's not happening, I think CDPR should go with Sony this time because of two reasons:
1. Witcher 3 was on Microsoft's stage last time, and it should be on sony's stage to re-establish CDPR's neutrality.
2. Neither Witcher 1 or 2 were released on Sony's Playstation, but Witcher 2 was released on microsoft's Xbox. So I believe that CDPR should target the Sony audience because they are naturally less familiar with the series, and assure them that they will enjoy the game although they haven't played the previous entries.
3. Sony's going to get more attention this year, because they have big plans for E3 introducing Project Morpheus and Playstation Now, showing off Uncharted 4, revealing at least 3 new IPs, probably showing a demo of the Order 1866, and possibly sequels to other favorite Sony series such as God of War. CDPR would benefit from the attention, if they go with Sony.
They aren't neutral already (consoles wise) since thy don't plan to support Steam Machines anyway (at least so far). I actually don't see CDPR appearing on Sony or MS stages as something to be especially boasting with. Yes, they do it for PR, but otherwise dealing with them isn't a pleasant experience.
Wait, dealing with Sony or Microsoft isn't a pleasant experience for CDPR? Where is that conviction coming from? Personal experience with Microsoft or Sony employees? Because I bet both companies have plenty of nice people among their staff.
For any developer for that matter. Getting on to their consoles is a tedious process because of their control freakery and all kind of levies they put in the way. Same goes for most of them (Nintendo isn't much better).
Some nice people on staff doesn't change the attitude and policies of those companies who have some very not nice people on staff who actually set those policies.
Last edited:
Well, so far CDPR publicly praised their cooperation with both Sony and MS on bringing Witcher 3 to the new consoles and described both companies as really supportive. So one developer might actually be quite happy with the partnership.
@gregski: Of course they'd praise it. Do you think they want to ruin their relations by saying all they really think about them? I'd be more interested in some internal opinions, rather than PR. But I doubt we'll get those.
Oh oh.
On one hand we have CDProjekt's statements praising their partnership with Sony and Microsoft. What exactly can you offer to back your claims? Are you privy to what goes on between CDProjekt and Microsoft and Sony? How would you know how CDProjekt really thinks if it hasn't been publicly disclosed?
I just hope CDPR reads some of the threads about them. All it takes is one look at the NeoGAF thread about that latest Article & you can see that if CDPR offers some kind of in-game pre-order bonus, even something as small as what Dark Souls II had, people are going to be fucking angry.
They get all the praise for being practically the only decent company in the industry that don't fuck over their Consumers & at this stage they've got so much trust on that alone, even a few little in-game pre-order bonuses is going to cause a huge backlash.
Just give us a CE & Standard Retail Editions that come with just "real" goodies & then the GOG Version can have Digital Soundtrack, Artbook (And whatever else they have planned that is "Fucking Amazing") etc but no in-game bonuses. Please? I only say it because I don't want to see an angry mob come at CDPR & then have everyone start to doubt them.
They get all the praise for being practically the only decent company in the industry that don't fuck over their Consumers & at this stage they've got so much trust on that alone, even a few little in-game pre-order bonuses is going to cause a huge backlash.
Just give us a CE & Standard Retail Editions that come with just "real" goodies & then the GOG Version can have Digital Soundtrack, Artbook (And whatever else they have planned that is "Fucking Amazing") etc but no in-game bonuses. Please? I only say it because I don't want to see an angry mob come at CDPR & then have everyone start to doubt them.
@JupiteronMars: Claims that console companies are nasty? There are tons of examples. Often they charge developers not just for selling the game through them, but for developing it. I.e. for each developed copy they charge a tax (for example to prevent them from giving it to those who bought it for other platforms). In general CDPR's approach is that once you bought your copy, you get versions for whatver OSes they support. But on consoles they can't do it (or may be can, but they'll have to pay that tax, which is a loss for them, so they don't do it).
Or because Sony and MS actually want The Witcher 3 on their platform, because both platforms need all the games they can get. And to lose The Witcher 3 to one of their competitors is a mistake. So when CDPR says their cooperation with Sony and MS has been good and without any kind of hassle, I can believe that because those companies still have to sell their consoles and offer a good selection of games.
Sorry, no no no no.
You implied that, regarding their partnerships, CDProjekt's public statements do not match what they really believe. I want to know how do you know that.
No no no would be no if you'd actually show that from developers who aren't giving a PR talk. The problems I described aren't imaginary and they are present (you can see it in TW2 already).
Last edited:
Good lord, when did this topic turn into a MS/Sony evil corperation hate speech? I am sure that both have their faults and some nasty people and operations but the same can be said for nearly every company out there. There are actually far worse companies to complain about. I am also curious what the basis for all your statements are Gilrond, besides hearsay and assumptions.
@501105: Examples from developers who work on releasing their games for multiple platforms. For example Pencil Test Studios wrote how they can't offer all versions because of such restrictions (i.e. it's either or, because they need to pay the tax on the development itself). That's not a novel thing for such companies to charge for using development tools per released copy of what you are developing (which is quite weird in my view).