Right but the problem is: a game in motion never looks better than screenshots/stills. Well done screenshots are usually the upper limit of the visual quality of a game.
- Status
Someone on NeoGAF just posted description of presentation (from PAX?) with some interesting informations.
Started off with a quest in the swamps where he was saving a woman trapped in her house by a band of thugs. They used this encounter to show off the new gore / dismemberment mechanics I was talking about as well as showing off the "Sign" system in Witcher 3.
Next they tracked the Griffin we've been shown through the woods and had an extended fight with it. After that they got on a horse and road all the way into the massive city, sorry can't remember its name now, and showed off the dynamics of it and how you can interact with traders / shops and can use multiple different methods with them. One example they gave was how you can turn in a trophy from a hunt to a shopkeeper for a reward or instead late at night break in and steal the money from him and keep the trophy for yourself. After that they rode through the breadth of the city to show off how large it was and mentioned how every single blade of grass / item is hand placed so that everything looks extremely detailed. They ended the demo by showing Geralt standing on a bridge outside of town looking at the city as well as the mountains saying the stereotypical "If you see it you can go there." This may have been made public by now but I'm not sure. I know the Griffin fight has been but I haven't seen the rest shown anywhere.
Anyways the game looked phenomenal, I'm not trying in any way to discredit it. The only real rough patch in the demo was framerate was very rough.
Started off with a quest in the swamps where he was saving a woman trapped in her house by a band of thugs. They used this encounter to show off the new gore / dismemberment mechanics I was talking about as well as showing off the "Sign" system in Witcher 3.
Next they tracked the Griffin we've been shown through the woods and had an extended fight with it. After that they got on a horse and road all the way into the massive city, sorry can't remember its name now, and showed off the dynamics of it and how you can interact with traders / shops and can use multiple different methods with them. One example they gave was how you can turn in a trophy from a hunt to a shopkeeper for a reward or instead late at night break in and steal the money from him and keep the trophy for yourself. After that they rode through the breadth of the city to show off how large it was and mentioned how every single blade of grass / item is hand placed so that everything looks extremely detailed. They ended the demo by showing Geralt standing on a bridge outside of town looking at the city as well as the mountains saying the stereotypical "If you see it you can go there." This may have been made public by now but I'm not sure. I know the Griffin fight has been but I haven't seen the rest shown anywhere.
Anyways the game looked phenomenal, I'm not trying in any way to discredit it. The only real rough patch in the demo was framerate was very rough.
Last edited:
Yes, but being that they are a busy company, they may not have time to set up really well done screenshots. Also, I may be wrong but some these could also be old screenshots that they just decided to publish now. Even if that is not the case, it's best not to jump to conclusions, and just to accept that we don't know all the details.
So people are bringing up this story again. So let me talk expectations.
The PC version of The Witcher 3 will must likely come with all the fancy tech. The game should look amazing on PC. No one needs to worry about that.
Now for the console versions. The Witcher 3 is an open world sand box type of game. Open world sand box type games tends to have lower resolution, lower frames, lower draw distance, lower textures, on consoles. Rockstar's big budgets and man power can't even change that.
People are mentioning PR talk and claims but if they just take a moment and think, they can form logical expectations of how The Witcher 3 will perform on consoles. I read long ago that CD Projekt RED said that better graphics over The Witcher 2 was not the goal but more detail over The Witcher 2.
So far from what I've seen in the gameplay demos, The Witcher 3 on consoles should look decent enough.
Now onto the recently released pics. Cd Projekt RED can show any pics from any stage of development. It doesn't always have to be pics of where the game is at now in development. I still say gameplay matters not pics. And CD Projekt RED already showned 40 minutes of gameplay. Now that's more than enough. From now on just expect all the rubbish pics from development, that Witcher fans love so much.
It is important that CD Projekt RED doesn't fall into the same trap that Watch Dogs show itself in. Watch Dogs was shown in all it's glory at E3 and when Watch Dogs was released it didn't live up to the glory. So far there has not been gameplay of The Witcher 3 in all it's glory. So when the game gets released there is going to be that wow factor.
Hell CD Projekt RED can release a pic of a stick man with a sword and say that is how Geralt's life started and I'll have it as a background picture saying wow.
The PC version of The Witcher 3 will must likely come with all the fancy tech. The game should look amazing on PC. No one needs to worry about that.
Now for the console versions. The Witcher 3 is an open world sand box type of game. Open world sand box type games tends to have lower resolution, lower frames, lower draw distance, lower textures, on consoles. Rockstar's big budgets and man power can't even change that.
People are mentioning PR talk and claims but if they just take a moment and think, they can form logical expectations of how The Witcher 3 will perform on consoles. I read long ago that CD Projekt RED said that better graphics over The Witcher 2 was not the goal but more detail over The Witcher 2.
So far from what I've seen in the gameplay demos, The Witcher 3 on consoles should look decent enough.
Now onto the recently released pics. Cd Projekt RED can show any pics from any stage of development. It doesn't always have to be pics of where the game is at now in development. I still say gameplay matters not pics. And CD Projekt RED already showned 40 minutes of gameplay. Now that's more than enough. From now on just expect all the rubbish pics from development, that Witcher fans love so much.
It is important that CD Projekt RED doesn't fall into the same trap that Watch Dogs show itself in. Watch Dogs was shown in all it's glory at E3 and when Watch Dogs was released it didn't live up to the glory. So far there has not been gameplay of The Witcher 3 in all it's glory. So when the game gets released there is going to be that wow factor.
Hell CD Projekt RED can release a pic of a stick man with a sword and say that is how Geralt's life started and I'll have it as a background picture saying wow.
Last edited:
Well, that's not really correct. It was a bugged down version of gameplay without any difficulty. Actually it wasn't much more than a long ingame trailer or "orchestrated" ingame material. Not prerendered but controlled in every sense of the word.
Maybe it's finally time to actually let some people PLAY the game instead of just showing stuff. I don't believe anything before somebody outside of CDPR wasn't even able to play the game, go where they want, speak to people, fight against monsters, ride and so on. You know, the real gameplay...
Sounds like the same demo they've been doing with the same build since the early summer (E3). Surprisingly this same build still produces the same visuals, gameplay and limitations (patchy framerate, some drops in texture quality). How on earth can the same build played on the same hardware produce the same results? What is this witchcraft?
Well, that's not really correct. It was a bugged down version of gameplay without any difficulty. Actually it wasn't much more than a long ingame trailer or "orchestrated" ingame material. Not prerendered but controlled in every sense of the word.
Maybe it's finally time to actually let some people PLAY the game instead of just showing stuff. I don't believe anything before somebody outside of CDPR wasn't even able to play the game, go where they want, speak to people, fight against monsters, ride and so on. You know, the real gameplay...
Don't understand the part about the difficulty, if your referring to the fact that they have killed everything with a single blow-well they have told that it was the easiest mode, if not then i dont know what your referring too, what goes to letting people play the game at this stage, its just not gona happen, cose the game is still in develop proses(thers more then 4 months to release) and whats more you dont show a product like that so far away from the premier, nowadays people not only hate but simply dont tolerate that they have to wait, so give me an example of a producer that lets people to play the game at that stage? it would just be stupid, when you plan the HYPE TRAIN you do it in a month or max two before the release(cose its rather hard to keep the train going for any longer) so before the next year there is rather no possibility that anyone would get to play the real game.
Guys, can you tell me the name of that """""""insider""""""" of neogaf mentioned in this thread?
Well, that's not really correct. It was a bugged down version of gameplay without any difficulty. Actually it wasn't much more than a long ingame trailer or "orchestrated" ingame material. Not prerendered but controlled in every sense of the word.
Maybe it's finally time to actually let some people PLAY the game instead of just showing stuff. I don't believe anything before somebody outside of CDPR wasn't even able to play the game, go where they want, speak to people, fight against monsters, ride and so on. You know, the real gameplay...
It's almost like you want the game to be finished already and have other people playing the game and telling you that it will be all good.
When I said it's good enough, I meant it's good enough for me. I got to see the game in action. I got to see missions, characters, how parts of the world looks, monsters, when that werewolf got bigger with muscle, just wow. I got to see water physics, combat, ect.
The least important thing I saw was the difficulty level of the game. Who wants to see someone try to kill one werewolf for 30 minutes.
The thing about "real gameplay" where the game is finished and other people get to mess with the game. The Witcher 3 is foremost a story game. So having people playing the game means spoilers. For me those 40 minutes that was shown is way too much spoilers for me.
Other people playing the game already. Like I need to read that RockPaperShotgun hates the game.
The real gameplay come when I get to play through the story on Feb 24th 2015. So far I have no concerns about the game.
Because it is the same build. It's a stable old build that is good for demonstrations. They probably haven't changed it to make anything in it new or better since E3. Just like MGSV and Dragon age and other games. Same build as E3 at PAX for MGSV and the dragon age stream recently was the E3 build (And crashed when they tried to make potions)
Or am I missing sarcasm here.
Last edited:
Watch Dogs could actually easily acheive what was promised - on PC that is an a guy messed with a few files found out that the version presented at E3 still excisted in the game and managed to activate it. The reason for gimping the PC version hasn't been clarified by UBISOFT but there seem to be a trend in the industry with the release of the NEXT-GEN consoles to work after the lowest standard and not caring for the PCs power.
-----
In general I think the commotion about the concerns for The Witcher III game is only a statement to CDPRs success and quality as a game developer. I can understand people getting tired of hearing about the same issues when they visit this forum many times daily but I can also so easily understand the fans that reads something on gaming sites, other forums etc. becoming nervous and wants answers and then comes to this forum for them.
I don't see this as negative, but as mentioned as a statement to the success of CDPR and that they have lots of fans/people greatly looking forward and eagerly anticipating The Witcher 3. And that's after all a good thing. It only means CDPR will exist in many years to come.
Journalists get to play "hands on" demos pretty early all the time to be able to deliver first-hand early experiences to their readers. And since CDPR is actually an independent studio without a big publisher there is also no corporation ruling them to hide the game as long as possible. If you look at other independent studios most of them have presented playable versions of their games much, much earlier in develoment.
And yes, it's an issue for me that I don't know whether the gameplay and combat will be any good. I'm not one of these people who thinks that games are all about visuals and that you could reason a fun and entertaining game from seeing a cool trailer or orchestrated walkthrough in which the actual combat was dumbed down to not waste precious time on actual gameplay. I mean, you need the super-awesome graphics for creating the biggest hype possible. Sorry, but that seems exactly to be the same strategy Ubisoft, EA, Activision and all the other big pubs are using to seduce their possible customers into preordering their games. Who cares about the gameplay if the visuals are all nice?
No, I don't want that. But it seems at least strange to me that the game is now in (pre-)alpha state for more than a whole year now. There was an orchestrated developer demo on E3 2013 and there was another one a year later on E3 2014. What have they done in the meantime? What have they done since last E3? Why did they even present the game so early to the public if it was more or less only existing on paper for such a long time? That's pure marketing, driving the hype. Showing the people nice trailers and awesome visuals and sceneries but not giving them any chance to see the game in a working state (no matter how rough it is...) for a huge amount of time doesn't seem right to me. It's like they had to hide something from us although we know that they are actually independent and no outside publisher rules them to hide the game as long as possible. CDPR wanted to release the game initially this autumn so it should have at least reached beta stadium now if the delay was really just about "increasing quality and optimization". But still nobody has really see a running "free" version of the game so far. They haven't visited any media outlet so far, presenting an early alpha/beta version and letting the journalists play at least 5 minutes of the game on their own. I don't know, that's just seems suspicious to me. Either it's just plain bad marketing and over-hyping or they really have to hide something and they are really on crunch for quite some time now with a lot of unsolved issues...
Hm, it seems games are only about graphics and visuals for you. That's typical hyping, sorry. It looks great but visuals never made games great. They can only make a fund and entertaining game even better. But if the core systems of the game (you know, the actual gameplay) suck good graphics and awesome art design don't help much. Just have a look at Crytek's games in the past five years for a good example for that...
I want to see it because that's exactly what I as the player will do in the game once it's released. That's gameplay. Combat is one of the core elements of a game like Witcher 3. It's about combat and dialogues, and in the end about story and character progression. It's not about graphics. The just serve as background to please the eye while you are actually playing the game. But who cares about visuals if the combat sucks? If it's no fun at all to fight against a werewolf all the nice visuals and art design are just wasted resources...
Well, I guess you like buying a pig in a poke. Personally, I think it's helpful to hear other people's opinions about games and their experiences with games. Good journalists can deliver through their writing (or video editing) whether they find the game enjoyable or not without spoilering much. At this early stage it's more about a general impression whether they are able to deliver on their promises anyway and not about details of the story.
Well, in short, I want and expect CDPR to be better than big pubs and the bad old "industry standard". I don't want them to drive the hype train but to deliver actual information and content. They should be honest and upfront with us. They should include the most passionate fans into the development process instead of relying on blabla rhetorics and PR. But I got more and more the feeling that they just act like another big publisher with the same politics and behaviours in place, putting marketing and sales above all. I really hope I'm wrong. I really hope that just their politics suck and not the game itself. I really hope that the game is doing great and that they've solved every major problem. I really hope that they really just held back actual gameplay to blow us away some day. I really hope that they just started their marketing campaign way too early. But I fear, I honestly fear that there is more to that. I fear that they really have some major problems with the game and that they just don't know yet how to solve them and how to solve them in time... :/
Last edited:
Damn, CD Red doomed himself
They hyped and crowned themselves gods between bad developers
if we consider that tw2 sold like 4,5 (and the others 1,5 tw1) and that all tw1 were tw2 players, this means that if there are 12 millions that watched the e3 only for see witcher videos (and there was, I remember in gamestop people commenting "shit","terrible"," Batman arkham knight is overhyped", and then arrives tw3 and you could see in the chat only "finally I was waiting for this","heh, the best game finally came") we could say that tw3 is getting almost 3 times their public before, and you know how?
Sending promises like no-DRM, no exclusive in-game content plus a huge fanboy army spread the fame of cdred the honest across all the world, and for "Honor and duty" to cdred was imposed an ethic code of "best rpg graphics, mature plot, excellent combat, thousand of different ends, a lot of hours to play" and they got obligated to do this, to hold such a title a developer can't fail, it was imposed so much expectatives that then a minimun failure would cause the burn of all cdreds developers, of course it was delayed, because they need to make such an effort to do what was promised (even if it weren't their promises), you see what happened to watch dogs, is a really good game but much less of what was promised, and soon the witcher could be next, and they know that, and to this not happen they need to do their limit
It's natural feeling angry when things like this happens :/ but you should know that you requested too much also (I still hope that they get to do it)
They hyped and crowned themselves gods between bad developers
if we consider that tw2 sold like 4,5 (and the others 1,5 tw1) and that all tw1 were tw2 players, this means that if there are 12 millions that watched the e3 only for see witcher videos (and there was, I remember in gamestop people commenting "shit","terrible"," Batman arkham knight is overhyped", and then arrives tw3 and you could see in the chat only "finally I was waiting for this","heh, the best game finally came") we could say that tw3 is getting almost 3 times their public before, and you know how?
Sending promises like no-DRM, no exclusive in-game content plus a huge fanboy army spread the fame of cdred the honest across all the world, and for "Honor and duty" to cdred was imposed an ethic code of "best rpg graphics, mature plot, excellent combat, thousand of different ends, a lot of hours to play" and they got obligated to do this, to hold such a title a developer can't fail, it was imposed so much expectatives that then a minimun failure would cause the burn of all cdreds developers, of course it was delayed, because they need to make such an effort to do what was promised (even if it weren't their promises), you see what happened to watch dogs, is a really good game but much less of what was promised, and soon the witcher could be next, and they know that, and to this not happen they need to do their limit
It's natural feeling angry when things like this happens :/ but you should know that you requested too much also (I still hope that they get to do it)
I am a simple consumer. If I see something that I might like or want to try something out, I'll buy it. If I don't like it, I will sell the product and never buy something like that again.
I bought Assassins Creed 1, hated it, sold it, never bought another Assassins Creed game again. Brought Simcity 3000, loved it. Brought Simcity 4, loved it. Brought Simcity 5, hated it. Can't sell it. So more hate. I hated that online DRM so much that I don't buy EA games anymore. It's that simple to me.
People can't just buy and sell PC games anymore. So now the game is to just get you to buy the product. Listen to the sales man. The gaming industry is filled with people in sales. Peoples who job description is to sell you a product. A salesman. If I hear a sales pitch, I stop listening and say shut the fuck up and fuck off. Show me the No DRM and show me the gameplay.
It is 2014 and people have not learnt from the Peter Molyneux days. Why do people live off every word of a salesman. I liked Fable but that's me. I never followed nor listened to Peter Molyneux promising bullshit. I judged the product for what it was.
It's good that CD Projekt RED wants to try different things and test out different features. But don't get caught up in a world where you expect all those things. Don't live off the words of PR and the minds of developers. Judge the product for what it is.
The Witcher 3 will be a good game to those who liked the other Witcher games. If you didn't like the Witcher games then you might not like The Witcher 3. But buy it anyway. Promote AAA games with No DRM. We need more of those on the PC market.
My sales pitch.
I bought Assassins Creed 1, hated it, sold it, never bought another Assassins Creed game again. Brought Simcity 3000, loved it. Brought Simcity 4, loved it. Brought Simcity 5, hated it. Can't sell it. So more hate. I hated that online DRM so much that I don't buy EA games anymore. It's that simple to me.
People can't just buy and sell PC games anymore. So now the game is to just get you to buy the product. Listen to the sales man. The gaming industry is filled with people in sales. Peoples who job description is to sell you a product. A salesman. If I hear a sales pitch, I stop listening and say shut the fuck up and fuck off. Show me the No DRM and show me the gameplay.
It is 2014 and people have not learnt from the Peter Molyneux days. Why do people live off every word of a salesman. I liked Fable but that's me. I never followed nor listened to Peter Molyneux promising bullshit. I judged the product for what it was.
It's good that CD Projekt RED wants to try different things and test out different features. But don't get caught up in a world where you expect all those things. Don't live off the words of PR and the minds of developers. Judge the product for what it is.
The Witcher 3 will be a good game to those who liked the other Witcher games. If you didn't like the Witcher games then you might not like The Witcher 3. But buy it anyway. Promote AAA games with No DRM. We need more of those on the PC market.
My sales pitch.
@Ryanza
CDPR's no-DRM policy is a PURE sales pitch, man. It's pure marketing and PR.
How do you know that Witcher 3 will be a good game? At the same time you claim that you don't believe other developers anymore and you accuse other people of believing the words of sales people. But that's what you're doing here as well...
CDPR's no-DRM policy is a PURE sales pitch, man. It's pure marketing and PR.
How do you know that Witcher 3 will be a good game? At the same time you claim that you don't believe other developers anymore and you accuse other people of believing the words of sales people. But that's what you're doing here as well...
The PC gaming market needs a strong push against DRM. So No DRM is not just a sales pitch but a need in a market that desperately needs new AAA games to be DRM-free.
"We're sick of DRM... it just screws with us while pirates don't have to deal with it."
"OK, how about no DRM on stuff from GoG?"
"Haha! Nice try, that's pure PR!"
Yeah... seems legit.
Last edited:
- Status