Crime system

[Agent_Blue]

Freedom to approach an objective =/= stealing. If there was an objective/quest that Geralt could solve through stealing, then I am fully for enabling stealing for that section. Pretty sure my foot is just fine.

That's just it. There are tons and tons and tons of quests where theft would be a viable alternative to a massacre. It's that too hard to imagine? Your foot's still smoking.

 

[ReptilePZ]

He could of also chosen to enter someones house without permission or taking something that does not belong to him in game. Had Sapkowski played the game I think you would find he would of done so. By giving the choice to the player the player becomes 'Sapkowski' over what the character does. Geralt of Rivia is who I chose him to be based on the choices offered to me. Who he was before I took control of shaping his actions, his choices and his personality is no longer the same person, he has become my variation of Geralt since the first choice made back when played TW1 up till now.

You the player are shaping Geralt from the first game until the last, it is no longer Sapkowski's Geralt it is your interpretation of him played out through choices offered to you. If class system was offered to the player, the player would have every right to have Geralt roleplay as an archer, that becomes Geralts future self like every choice in the game which changes Geralt from who he was to who he becomes.

You really are being a very self centered and selfish person in what your asking for. You asking them to take something away from others because you do not want to make use of it even though it is optional and has NO impact on your character in your game if others wished to do so on their own versions of Geralt in their own homes on their own copy of the game.

Nobody is taking anything away from you. What I'm asking is for an unnecessary, plot breaking system to not be added =/

We're not talking about what Sapkwoski as a player would do, we're discussing what Sapkowski as the creator of Geralt's character would do. And that question (in terms of stealing) is answered in the books, where Geralt does not do that under normal conditions.

 

[ReptilePZ]

That's just it. There are tons and tons and tons of quests where theft would be a viable alternative to a massacre. It's that too hard to imagine? Your foot's still smoking.

Nah, foot's fine, don't worry about it. Which quest in particular do you think can be solved by stealing 20 orens from a random house?

Is it the quest where you kill a beast to save a village? Is it the quest where you save your friend from being a captive? Or maybe the quest where you defend yourself from the Wild Hunt?

Sure, there are instances where stealing shit could be an option, but not always. And if it can be a way to achieve your goal, I don't see what's the problem with making that one specific item lootable, instead of making every single item ever lootable, thus making it possible to break the character of the protagonist in a game that is primarily focused on story and features a protagonist with predetermined morality.

 

[dragoonlordz]

Nobody is taking anything away from you. What I'm asking is for an unnecessary, plot breaking system to not be added =/

We're not talking about what Sapkwoski as a player would do, we're talking waht Sapkowski as the creator if Geralt's character would do. And that question (in terms of stealing) is answered in the books, where Geralt does not do that under normal conditions.

It has no impact on plot anymore so then walking left or walking right down the street in a town (scripted quest related stealing impacts the plot but unscripted does not even if add consequence to it still does not since it does not move the main story forward), it has no impact on your roleplaying of your Geralt in your game, it does not break your Geralts character because you are not forced to do it therefore if you do not do it your character remains true to your perception of him. What others do with theirs is irrelevant to yours.

So you are asking for it's removal from the franchise in the final game when has been present throughout. I am certain such has already been added to this final game and what remains is probably the choice of whether to enhance the criminal system to cover theft and trespass. If I was a betting man I bet even those such systems are planned already even if not ironed out yet. Simply because it is what CDPR have always done in previous games so it is very likely would be also added already to this final one. In fact it is more likely because of the open-world design and giving the player even more freedom in this game.

 

[ReptilePZ]

It has no impact on plot, it has no impact on your roleplaying of your Geralt in your game, it does not break your Geralts character because you are not forced to do it therefore if you do not do it your character remains true to your perception of him. What others do with theirs is irrelevant to yours.

So you are asking for it's removal from the franchise in the final game when has been present throughout. I am certain such has already been added to this final game and what remains is probably the choice of whether to enhance the criminal system to cover theft and trespass. If I was a betting man I bet even those such systems are planned already even if not ironed out yet. Simply because it is what CDPR have always done in previous games so it is very likely would be also added already to this final one. In fact it is more likely because of the open-world design and giving the player even more freedom in this game.

You keep saying "your", "theirs". Geralt is neither mine nor yours. His morality should not be determined by you or me, beacuse it already has been determined by the author.

Let's take a look at the Dragonborn. He's the player's avatar in that world. You're free to do whatever you want with that character. Geralt is not there to represent the player. Geralt is there so that the player can experience the story through his eyes. Players are also given the option to choose what Geralt does at certain plot points, where that choice is not black and white, at places where either choice is equally valid and does not compromise geralt's morality. Geralt himself justifies his actions in the flashbacks that follow those decisions. This is there to make the players more involved with the story, it is not there to allow the player to customise the character's personality.

 

[dragoonlordz]

You keep saying "your", "theirs". Geralt is neither mine nor yours. His morality should not be determined by you or me, beacuse it already has been determined by the author.

Let's take a look at the Dragonborn. He's the player's avatar in that world. You're free to do whatever you want with that character. Geralt is not there to represent the player. Geralt is there so that the player can experience the story through his eyes. Players are also given the option to choose what Geralt does at certain plot points, where that choice is not black and white, at places where either choice is equally valid and does not compromise geralt's morality. Geralt himself justifies his actions in the flashbacks that follow those decisions. This is there to make the players more involved with the story, it is not there to allow the player to customise the character's personality.

I explained where you are wrong in regards to who's Geralt he is many times already as far as I am concerned. You just choose not to accept that.

 

[ReptilePZ]

And I explained where you are wrong in regards to who's Geralt he is many times already.

I am not convinced though. I do not agree with your take on Geralt's character in the games. Clearly, you don't see my point either. I don't think there's a reason to continue this discussion.

 

[dragoonlordz]

I am not convinced though. I do not agree with your take on Geralt's character in the games. Clearly, you don't see my point either. I don't think there's a reason to continue this discussion.

The difference however is I am not asking them to impose my perception and rules of Geralt on you. You are. I am happy for you to play how you want, steal don't steal I leave to you and what you want to do or feel is right for the Geralt you are playing while you are on the other hand trying to stop others from doing what you do not want to do yourself with yours.

 

[ReptilePZ]

The difference however is I am not asking them to impose my perception and rules of Geralt on you. You are. I am happy for you to play how you want, steal don't steal I leave to you and what you want to do or feel is right for the Geralt you are playing while you are on the other hand trying to stop others from doing what you do not want to do yourself with yours.

It's not my perception of whether Geralt would steal or not, it's how the author has created the character but whatever.

 

[Demut]

I don't think there's a reason to continue this discussion.

Yeah, it’s been going in circles for a while now.

An open world needs to have the illusion of a proper world, so a basic thieving system and reputation must be there. Since the player controls Geralt he should have the choice.

So then would you proponents mind answering our questions? Do you want CDPR to implement locked doors, a lockpicking skill and a pickpocketing one as well? After all, you’re all about choice, right? And since immersion is important you can’t have people be all utopian and not lock their doors when there’s thieving Witchers about.

 

[Agent_Blue]

Yeah, it’s been going in circles for a while now.


So then would you proponents mind answering our questions? Do you want CDPR to implement locked doors, a lockpicking skill and a pickpocketing one as well? After all, you’re all about choice, right? And since immersion is important you can’t have people be all utopian and not lock their doors when there’s thieving Witchers about.

How hard, you say, is it to bash open a lock especially when you hav a convenient sign at your disposal? It wouldn't be uncommon for peasants in small communities to leave their doors unlocked. Burglary doesn't necessarily involve lockpicking.

Personally, I see no need for a lockpicking, let alone a pickpocketing skill, which no one requested. Your rhetorical question thus amounts to a slippery slope fallacy.

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

I agree with the proposition of not having any loot in any house (barring rare exceptions if they are plot related).

With an open world, TW3 will have more than enough space and alternatives to provide loot and items without having to put them in people's houses or tents that they are seemingly indifferent about.

And so with that, TW3 would not need a crime system.
That said, I can maybe accept a faction reputation system as long as it's implemented well.

 

[Demut]

It wouldn't be uncommon for peasants in small communities to leave their doors unlocked.

Even if that were true (which I kinda doubt), we’d then still need locks in the cities of TW3 And what sign are you talking about? Aard? Yeah, sure, it’s not like anyone would notice you using that to blast open doors.

Personally, I see no need for a lockpicking, let alone a pickpocketing skill, which no one requested. Your rhetorical question thus amounts to a slippery slope fallacy.

It does not. It’s simply like this: You are saying that we should be able to break&enter and then steal people’s stuff. So why not relieve them of their possessions right there on the street? Why do you want to impose artificial limitations on me, Agent Blue? DON’T RESTRICT MY CHOICES, YOU DON’T HAVE TO USE IT IF YOU DON’T WANT TO, MATE!

 

[vivaxardas2015]

Why would Geralt become a thief and a burglar? I can understand when it is quest-related, and Geralt may have a need to blast the door. But to make theft and robbery his regular occupation? Geralt-Novigradian pickpocket? No. Just do not put any loot into significant places (like Henselt's tent in TW2 when it looked really funny - Geralt robbing the kind blind even before he speaks to him), and we'll be fine.

 

[Agent_Blue]

Even if that were true (which I kinda doubt), we’d then still need locks in the cities of TW3 />/> And what sign are you talking about? Aard? Yeah, sure, it’s not like anyone would notice you using that to blast open doors.


It does not. It’s simply like this: You are saying that we should be able to break&enter and then steal people’s stuff. So why not relieve them of their possessions right there on the street? Why do you want to impose artificial limitations on me, Agent Blue? DON’T RESTRICT MY CHOICES, YOU DON’T HAVE TO USE IT IF YOU DON’T WANT TO, MATE!



/>/>

I see no need for a lockpicking and pickpocketing skill for the reasons explained above but I'm not actively raising my voice against any of those features. I'm sure you can tell the difference.

This is getting tiresome and dangerously close to personal so I'll eject myself out of this discussion. For now, that is.

 

[dragoonlordz]

Why would Geralt become a thief and a burglar? I can understand when it is quest-related, and Geralt may have a need to blast the door. But to make theft and robbery his regular occupation? Geralt-Novigradian pickpocket? No. Just do not put any loot into significant places (like Henselt's tent in TW2 when it looked really funny - Geralt robbing the kind blind even before he speaks to him), and we'll be fine.

Hey if my Geralt is a pervert who likes rummaging through peoples drawers let him, if he is short a few gold pieces to buy that nice new shiny sword then let him break open a piggy bank or two. Point is it does no harm to anyone else playing, does not effect their game playing not even their role playing because they are not making the same choice to do so. I say put loot everywhere. If you don't want to loot it then don't. Mine has been robbing people since the very first location in TW1, he continued to do so in TW2 and will again do so I am sure in TW3. That is my choice, you have the freedom to do choose differently.

 

[Demut]

Well, as we have explained before, while it’s true that we who oppose those mechanics are not necessarily immediately affected by them (safe by their inherent temptation, I guess) there are other reasons why we think it’s a good idea to not include them. Mainly, that doing so saves development resources, specifically: the time it takes to design/conceive, program, test, bug-fix them, and prevents un-lore-like situations from occurring.

 

[vivaxardas2015]

When I am playing Skyrim, I am prone to random acts of violence, and I steal and pickpocket like crazy. But with Geralt I can't quite imagine him falling so low as to pick a lock into some peasant's shack, or pick-pocket some girl on the market. Well, if it is an extra-feature CDPR want to implement, fine. I am not going to use it, but if others feel like it, so be it. But if it is something not on the list at all, it should stay off the list until other, more important features are implemented.

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

That is my choice, you have the freedom to do choose differently.

You are playing a set character, and while we have some leeway to pick his choices, we are still ultimately restricted to the same core person. A man who is genuine and who strives to be good.

So Geralt can no more be a thief than a murderer who kills people at random. Just like he can't side with the likes of Loredo, or any political faction unless necessary and temporary.

That's Geralt, and you do not have the freedom to have it otherwise and nor should you.

 

[Garrison72]

In one of the E3 articles it was said people will call gaurds if they see Geralt take something. So if this is true, then that could mean more elaborate thieving/stealing/sneaking mechanics which for me seems out of place in a Witcher game. So I'm curious how far they'll take the idea of him being caught stealing. Which leads to the related topic of where we'll be able to go in towns, and why or how we can get into people's homes.