And so what? xD
Your role is to be Geralt of Rivia, but this doesn't mean remove all other features (necessary feature, not secondary stuff) that indicate if a game is an RPG or not.
No, I don´t mean to understimate CDPR work, but this game is about Geralt of Rivia, and it has to be faithful to that and his "Lore"? I think it is said that way, but anyway, and don´t take this as some arrogant comment or something, I´m serious, what´s an RPG? I´m really curious about that nowadays, because by definiton, every game you play, it´s an RPG, if you play Uncharted, you´re palying the role of Nathan Drake, some kind of Indiana Jones... etc
What I mean is by definiton Role-Playing-Game was introdced by Dungeons&Dragons I think, for any person from teenage student to a factory worker, to take the role of someone else, a mage, an archer etc and you have to live(play) the character, and that´s what almost every game nowadays offers me, be somebody else for a few hours, take another role.
So... what´s the difference between a game where your role, it´s someone specific, like in this case Geralt of Rivia, and you have to play his characater/role, and something "Skyrim" style, where you customize your role to the very tiny detail, because I think the industry of gaming needs to start thinkining on that, because for people like that, the game and the developers are taking pressure, and making changes, like as an example, the crossbow.
I still remember reviews from TW2, where the reviewers said things like "The game isn´t bad but I wanted to be an archer" another "I wanted to be a mage..." and I was like "Seriously? you are a reviewer, and didn´t even do a little research on the history and circumstances" there are games in the market for those who want to play those roles, The wicther it isn´t one of them.
If you like TLOTR universe, you have games for that, if you like to do whatever you like or choose what you want, you have games for that, if you like Master Sapkowski universe, characters, stories etc. you play The Witcher. :lol:
I´m really sorry for the extension, I just wanted to take that out of my chest, and I used you as an excuse, sorry. But this is for all of us to discuss.
Last edited:
I disagree. Genre descriptions like "RPG" are only used to give people an impression what kind of game you make. They might come with expectations (like the one that there will be different armors) but they don't come with obligations. As a game designer you are free to include or not whatever you want to. If you think that some kinds of armor don't fit the character of the game or the general tone you are free to not include them no matter if some people expect them. There are no necessary features like you've said. Who says that they are necessary? Is there some council which decides what games have to offer or not? Of course, you personally could expect them because you like them. Then it would be just up to you to decide whether you buy the game or not with some features implemented or missing. But please don't try to establish some kind of objectified genre dogmatism...
I'm also very tired of this "it's a video game not a book" argument. Really, what does that mean? By definition a video game is an interactive experience based on certain rules. That's it. Whether you have one set of clothes or 1000 different pieces of armor in your game it doesn't change the nature of the medium itself. A Witcher 3 with only once piece of set of clothes would still be a video game, something you can play (interact) for yourself by rules CDPR invented. This argument is just pointless.
@EcoSeis
The Witcher games are imo action-adventure/RPG crossovers. In a "traditional" RPG you can choose your own role, your own character. In an action-adventure you play a given role (Lara Croft, Ezio Auditore, Nathan Drake,...). The witcher games are at the core action-adventures with deep RPG mechanics like the leveling system and the choice&consequence dialogue systems. That's why Witcher is a genre-hybrid imo.
Last edited:
I'd vote on a fur coat or something with feathers for Yen. Yes just the coat :heart:
Not exactly.
To the extent that videogames amount to interactive entertainment, and given that the ability to customize your gear by definition means increased interactivity, it's a perfectly valid point. Ad absurdum, a videogame that allows you to make a left or a right is more interactive than one that only gives you the chance to turn left. In essence, the latter is, comparatively speaking, more of a videogame. Same logic applies to gear. Practical and congruency considerations then determine which and how many gear variations to include, none of which seem to be at stake here.
I should clarify that I'm specifically talking about armour. When it comes to fundamental design decisions, I am at the other end of the spectrum. Devs should make their minds about which way to go and stick to it.
Secondly, the fact it's a videogame and not a book means additional degrees of creative freedom. Fundamental traits such as story background, the world at large, Geralt as a character, etc., should be rooted and steeped in pre-existing lore. But since the game is covering uncharted ground, it can definitely claim poetic license.
Fiction is about change. This new chapter will likely bring about lots of it. Circumstances change and sometimes characters have no choice but to change along. Even if reluctantly.
As far as I'm concerned, should there come a time when lore gets in the way of a better game, REDs should know what to do with it.
Last edited:
No, it's not a valid point. It's category thinking at its very best. It's just your (valid) opinion and trying to make it some kind of fact doesn't work. You also cannot argue that more interactivity and freedom in one element of the game is good in general or by design (because it makes a videogame more videogamey) and at the same time that more interactivity and freedom in another element (let's take for example the story) is bad. That's an incoherent argumentation tbh.
I agree on your take on lore in general. But there is one important thing you didn't mention: the devs should only deviate from the existing lore if it makes sense in a way to make the game more fun. For example changing the looks or the haircolor of a certain NPC makes absolutely no sense at all and definitely doesn't make the game more fun. And you shouldn't forget that "fun" is subjective (same is true for "a better game"). For many people (like me) the Witcher games are so good because they offer a coherent, living world, which actually works in its own creative limits created in Sapkowski's books. Giving more options can increase interactivity but it can also take away from this coherent and homogenic world and the feeling of playing Geralt anymore (giving too much interactivity and freedom can destroy the identity of the world and the certain feeling you have while playing certain characters, it can kill some of the emotional fascination of the franchise which is important for some fans of the franchise). So yes, of course CDPR have creative freedom, but only in some given limits of the franchise IMHO.
I still vote for a shirtless Geralt option, just for cool looks and fun. It could also make the game harder for the players that are up for a real challenge. No armor/shirtless Geralt gameplay would be badass guys, just saying.. It could also be cool XBONE/PS4 Achievement/Trophy award.
Last edited:
I would like a shirtless option for Triss and Yennefer too, not only Geralt xDI still vote for a shirtless Geralt option, just for cool looks and fun. It could also make the game harder for the players that are up for a real challenge. No armor/shirtless Geralt gameplay would be badass guys, just saying.. It could also be cool XBONE/PS4 Achievement/Trophy award.
I'm sure modders will have that covered about an hour after the game is released.
They all look fantastic,and i'm a fan of hooded armor sets.
And don't forget that upgrades could make all of these amor set look alot diffrent.
I've seen people on youtube post vids on TW2 with all armor sets but the problem being,most players didn't have the custom pieced sets to go with them.
And don't forget that upgrades could make all of these amor set look alot diffrent.
I've seen people on youtube post vids on TW2 with all armor sets but the problem being,most players didn't have the custom pieced sets to go with them.
Maybe it's a tad off-topic, but I was wondering what other blades Geralt will have.
Do we know if the daggers are only throwing weapons or they can be used in close combat?
I was asking because in the "Killing Monsters" trailer he slays the thugs with a knife.
Do we know if the daggers are only throwing weapons or they can be used in close combat?
I was asking because in the "Killing Monsters" trailer he slays the thugs with a knife.
Geralt can use only a silver and a steel sword. Well, he can also use other weapons, but... are useless.