Content Filter in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

[Mataresa]

Well, am I only one who think, that game can be mature even without gore, nudity and all that stuff?
Removing/censoring them from TW is unnecessary, IMHO.

Of course those things are not necessary for maturity, but the complexity of the plot, I would say. But those things are part of the world and belong there in this artistic vision.

 

[Damariel]

Let me start by saying that the Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings is by far the best game I have ever played. I am an avid fan of both the novel series as well as the games. However there are a couple things that have always disturbed me about the series. Rather things i would prefer to have the option to control. Namely (in order of importance):

Nudity: I understand that the Witcher series is mature and it does not portray nudity or sex in any juvenile manners and also that such matters are an important part of the Witcher series. That said, I personally would prefer to have the option to turn off nudity in the game. Something simple like the towel mod someone made for Triss for the Witcher 2 would be fantastic.

Violence: To be blunt, violence doesn't bother me in games. It didn't in the Witcher 2. However, i would really appreciate a "reduced violence" option or a "blood & gore on/off switch".

Language: A language filter would be greatly appreciated.

I am interested what you guys think about this. I'm not saying the content should be removed or the game made more child friendly, but i think there should be the option to control it for those who are a bit more sensitive. What do you guys think? Has CD Projekt considered this?

...Seriously?... Ok but... no.

 

[vivaxardas2015]

A bit off-topic about reputation system: the guy who started this debate already voted down to -14. May be we could cut him some slack? This thread is lovely and engaging, which is a good thing, and he did not really insulted anyone, just voiced his honest opinion. I'll go and bump it up a bit. We are all nice people here, kind of, right?

 

[cmdr_silverbolt]

I didn't downvote, but I am okay with letting the devs know, if they didn't read the comments, that this idea is not well received.

Like it has been mentioned, the resources used for censoring dialogue are better spent else where. Someone also mentioned mods or patches for censorship, and people who want them will be able to get them.

I just don't want the original product to be affected, intentionally or otherwise, because of these considerations.

 

[bengeddes]

Then maybe you'd never understand the Witcher world, I freindly advise you to read the books: you'll find Spakowski draws harder gore scenes. The series Witcher books are not a Walt Disney's tale, you know. CDPR love the Spakowski's White Wolf and they give him a digital life with an careful fidelity. Changing that is changing Spakwoski's creation.

I think you're casting me in an unfair light there. I don't expect Disney. I've read The Last Wish and Blood Of Elves. If I was talking about the books in any way (which I'm not) maybe you'd be justified in trying to take me down a peg or two.

Did I say I didn't like those combat moves or that they didn't belong in the game? No. In fact, I said I liked them quite a bit. They're exciting. I simply said that at no other point in the game does Geralt do that stuff, meaning there is a specific option to turn on/off detailed, unique kill-scenes (some of them at least).

I feel like I'm being interpreted as someone who wants the game censored. I do not. I'm simply describing something that exists in TW2, and saying I wouldn't be against it if the same was done in TW3.

@ Flix: Now that you mention it, I wish those moves were part of normal combat. This only means that we're missing out on the full range of attacks of which Geralt is capable.

It would be interesting. But I think it makes them more special that they only occur rarely. Something like, "look what Geralt is capable of when he really gets going!" Still, I don't think it adds to the realism. I think it adds to the fantastic aspect (Geralt is beyond human), which I like all the same.

So the blood gushing, the splatter, the hitting-the-opponent-in-unique-ways-to-exploit-critical-points, all of these aspects add substance to a made-up world by adding real life details.

Also, Geralt is not a teddy bear, and seeing him do these things adds another dimension for you to understand the character.

Also, you do in fact invalidate someone's creative expression when you censor it any shape of form. You're essentially saying that what they did was unnecessary, or something we can do without. I am saying that all things, as we witness in the game, are added for the purpose of defining the world and the characters.

Since this is a commercial product, you can get away with asking for censorship, but the truth is that you're maiming the art and storytelling, and let's not pretend otherwise.

But whatever, as long as the game does not suffer because of censorship DURING THE DEVELOPMENT process, I couldn't care less about what anyone else did.

See my reply to Witchat. You're preaching to choir about the ethics of censorship. I'm not for censorship and teddy bears and candy hearts. I simply thought the little finishers toggle in TW2 was a quick example to show how inoffensive and unobtrusive it could be to manage it (no one is crying out that TW2 is maimed after all).

 

[Mataresa]

A bit off-topic about reputation system: the guy who started this debate already voted down to -14. May be we could cut him some slack? This thread is lovely and engaging, which is a good thing, and he did not really insulted anyone, just voiced his honest opinion. I'll go and bump it up a bit. We are all nice people here, kind of, right?

Well doesn't that only mean, that a lot of people diasagree? If it would be inapropriate, it would be removed by a moderator. I didn't vote it down either though, since I wrote an answer.

 

[vivaxardas2015]

I didn't downvote, but I am okay with letting the devs know, if they didn't read the comments, that this idea is not well received.

Like it has been mentioned, the resources used for censoring dialogue are better spent else where. Someone also mentioned mods or patches for censorship, and people who want them will be able to get them.

I just don't want the original product to be affected, intentionally or otherwise, because of these considerations.

Sure, REDs will read this thread, and know our opinion, and will not try to tone down anything just to get published in Australia, for example. That's why it was a good thing to start this debate in the first place. I would hope the waste majority is against any kind of censoring and parent-control options. This is Sapkowski's and CDPR's vision, exactly as GOT TV Show is Martin's and HBO vision, so take it for what it is, or just leave it be.

Well doesn't that only mean, that a lot of people diasagree? If it would be inapropriate, it would be removed by a moderator. I didn't vote it down either though, since I wrote an answer.

It is a reputation system. Now a reputation of a guy with only four posts is marked on his home page as "poor". People may disagree with each other, but it shouldn't tarnish their reputation. We are here to debate, discuss, and often disagree, not to be of a single mind concerning any issue.

 

[cmdr_silverbolt]

@ Flix: dude, have you viewed swordplay in real life? There's nothing "fantastical" about those moves.

Also, like I said, there are a lot of considerations which are introduced when we view such cut-scenes, and when you toggle them out, you remove the ability to experience said considerations. Any piece of work is not just about what it is, but also about how it is viewed, perceived, and understood. I think it's the same with a tree falling in the forest not making a sound if no one hears it.

The thing to stress here is that violence, gore, nudity, and language in all mediums is meant to be appreciated beyond the superficial.*

*I am not talking about shock value here, which has it's own place and merit by the way.

 

[soldiergeralt]

his reputation is poor at this point because he chose to make a silly and unpopular statement, not just in the context of the witcher games, but also pertaining to society in general. the reputation system is working as intended.

 

[Agent_Blue]

It is a reputation system. Now a reputation of a guy with only four posts is marked on his home page as "poor". People may disagree with each other, but it shouldn't tarnish their reputation. We are here to debate, discuss, and often disagree, not to be of a single mind concerning any issue.

I sort of agree and disagree. The OP's a newcomer and he might be scared off and refrain from ever posting again. That would certainly be a terrible outcome, especially since even though I'm at odds with his request there's nothing there that warrants blemishing his forum reputation.

The problem might be just that. «Reputation» is such a precarious choice of words because disagreement and repudiation for, say, flamebait keep getting conflated and downvoted as if they were one and the same thing. Perhaps forum rules should further clarify the voting system.

However, this is not the first and certainly shan't be the last instance where a post gets questionably downvoted, far beyond its possible demerits. Are we to go after each and every one of these underdog posts, artificially upvote them even though we don't actually endorse them, just so to restore some sort of idealized equilibrium?

Let dust settle naturally.

 

[sidspyker]

Upvote till it's back to 0. I always thought those buttons seemed more appropriate as "contributes/doesn't contribute" instead of "like/dislike" style.

 

[vivaxardas2015]

To AgentBlue:
Actually, I do. I don't really like when people gang up on somebody even if I share their opinion. Reputation is for a person, disagreement is with his statements. We all have shown very clearly that we are against his proposal, which in itself wasn't disrespectful, did not present his view as a final truth on this matter, but actually asked for our opinions. But besides three pages of disagreeing posts he got also a bunch of rotten eggs into his face. A lot of obvious trolls weren't judged this harshly. That is what I find kind of weird on a forum where there are a lot of members over 21.

 

[wichat]

@Fix All characters move were made by experienced swordmen stunts through mocap hence they are quite real and possible. Even more if you know which kind of training Geralt and all witchers were subjected.

PS

Sorr If I can sound you a little harder when I write, English is not a flowing Language to me />/>


Edit, I just right voted +1 just because (as those who know me) I don't like red points.

 

[Agent_Blue]

To AgentBlue:
Actually, I do. I don't really like when people gang up on somebody even if I share their opinion. Reputation is for a person, disagreement is with his statements. We all have shown very clearly that we are against his proposal, which in itself wasn't disrespectful, did not present his view as a final truth on this matter, but actually asked for our opinions. But besides three pages of disagreeing posts he got also a bunch of rotten eggs into his face. A lot of obvious trolls weren't judged this harshly. That is what I find kind of weird on a forum where there are a lot of members over 21.

Oh, but I completely agree with you.

It's just that two wrongs don't make one right. The reputation system is currently way ambiguous so that if I were to upvote the OP my action might be misinterpreted as agreement where in fact I completely diverge. As I said, nothing in the OP is inflammatory but I grant other forum members the right to think differently or to use the voting system at their discretion without me feeling the need to rectify the results to fit my liking.

So what compels you to nullify the downvotes in this particular instance but not do the same in similar circumstances? I realize you mean well but this call for action only further messes things up. A clarification of the voting system might do the trick though.

 

[bengeddes]

@ Flix: dude, have you viewed swordplay in real life? There's nothing "fantastical" about those moves.

Actually, no I haven't. That's something I'll have to do before I die. But I'll eat my keyboard if you've seen someone blast another guy into the air and them stab him when he hits the ground, or shoot flames from his hands. Aard and Igni are involved in many of those moves.

And, I'm ready to admit I'm wrong on this, but dual wielding two full-size swords and thrusting them overhanded fully through the armor and chest of a man seems super-human. Not impossible, just waaayyy beyond normal. Likewise, holding your sword by the blade and whacking people with the hilt I'm sure is totally doable, but the sheer strangeness of it makes it VERY memorable and surreal.

Anyway, I know the sword-fighting itself is legit. The speed and power, as well as the magic touches, however, are witcher mutations, a fantasy.

 

[araa]

I actually agree with the top statement. I play newer games (though mostly family-friendly stuff like Braid) on the xbox at my parents' home during holidays and, as you can probably imagine, with the Witcher 2 it was somehow awkward. Hardly had I turned on the game for the first time when, just after the tutorial, there was a sex scene with Triss. And that was before I figured out how to skip cutscenes. Awkward. Guess it's my fault for playing it with my family around (considering the rating) but I just wanted to see what the game was like... sigh.

I ended up having to stay up at nights just so that I could play freely.

So well, an option to filter out nudity would be nice.

Also, it's sad that the top post got down-voted so much for no reason. Oh well.

 

[vivaxardas2015]

Oh, but I completely agree with you.

It's just that two wrongs don't make one right. The reputation system is currently way ambiguous so that if I were to upvote the OP my action might be misinterpreted as agreement where in fact I completely diverge. As I said, nothing in the OP is inflammatory but I grant other forum members the right to think differently or to use the voting system at their discretion without me feeling the need to rectify the results to fit my liking.

So what compels you to nullify the downvotes in this particular instance but not do the same in similar circumstances? I realize you mean well but this call for action only further messes things up. A clarification of the voting system might do the trick though.

Actually, no. His post was a cause for an interesting discussion. Even though his opinion is directly opposite of mine, he did not state it in a dogmatic manner as a final truth, but very politely expressed his view on the matter and asked for our input. It was an invitation to an interesting discussion on the matter. That's why it merits +1 from me. The reason I (also very politely) asked other forum members to bump up his rep is because I wanted to show that his post actually has a lot of merit. It would be sad to see an invitation to an honest open discussion downvoted as an attempt to start a flame war.

BTW, I tend to bump up any good and thoughtful post, even if I completely disagree. Life is damn boring without a good argument with friends.

 

[Mataresa]

I don't care about the reputation of a person, I will make up my own mind. And although I disagree with him, that doesn't mean, I don't respect his opinion or wouldn't want to hear it.

I would actually like him to go further into details, why he feels uncomfortable with these things and have a discussion about it, if it would take away from the game.

 

[Agent_Blue]

I actually agree with the top statement. I play newer games (though mostly family-friendly stuff like Braid) on the xbox at my parents' home during holidays and, as you can probably imagine, with the Witcher 2 it was somehow awkward. Hardly had I turned on the game for the first time when, just after the tutorial, there was a sex scene with Triss. And that was before I figured out how to skip cutscenes. Awkward. Guess it's my fault for playing it with my family around (considering the rating) but I just wanted to see what the game was like... sigh.

I ended up having to stay up at nights just so that I could play freely.

So well, an option to filter out nudity would be nice.

Also, it's sad that the top post got down-voted so much for no reason. Oh well.

While I certainly sympathize I see no need for the game, any game, to tailor itself to one's specific circumstances. It's a body of work whose creative integrity should be upheld. You yourself said you managed to navigate the circumstances at home and play the game. So why then do you believe devs should spend time implementing such option as opposed to spending time elsewhere in the game just so other individuals which obviously were not meant to be exposed to the game get exposed to the game?

You played Braid? Have you played Limbo? It's fantastic. What about The Swapper? It's great as well.

 

[Agent_Blue]

Actually, no. His post was a cause for an interesting discussion. Even though his opinion is directly opposite of mine, he did not state it in a dogmatic manner as a final truth, but very politely expressed his view on the matter and asked for our input. It was an invitation to an interesting discussion on the matter. That's why it merits +1 from me. The reason I (also very politely) asked other forum members to bump up his rep is because I wanted to show that his post actually has a lot of merit. It would be sad to see an invitation to an honest open discussion downvoted as an attempt to start a flame war.

BTW, I tend to bump up any good and thoughtful post, even if I completely disagree. Life is damn boring without a good argument with friends.

Again, I completely agree with you.

This interesting discussion is also his merit. He was courteous and expressed his viewpoints candidly. He requested forum feedback so in no way do I believe he deserves even a single downvote. I thought that was clear by now.

Yet, in my eyes, he certainly does not merit to get upvoted either. I disagree with him both in principle and on his specific requests. So to upvote the OP would be misrepresenting my take and that's why I believe your call for action, though well-meant, is misguided.