The problem is that generic is more or less, depending on the context, a negative connotation that clearly says "the witcher world isnt specific or special in any way, its just generic, it has the general things other fantasy has and nothing particular changing it"
If you didnt read it like that, thats ok, but thats what it means nonetheless.
He could have said slavic mythology and folklore with some traditional fantasy elements, or on the base of traditional races and medieval setting, but generic is literally used to describe an absence of specialty, because its just general.
I don't care much for what he said, but I can perfectly understand @Aes Sídhe.
Plus the witcher is much more than that. Just think for a second, if I come here and tell you "The Witcher formula, both for books and games, is that it’s the Slavic mythology mixed with generic fantasy (e.g. elves and dwarfs)" would that be accurate enough? you know its not, you know that definition completely ignores things like tone, focus on what inside said world, and a lot of other extremely important things.
I'm not saying he should've explained a whole paragraph of course, but its not about quantity, its more about precision. If some game thats not the witcher, descibes itself as slavic mythology with generic fantasy, more than one person if not most, would simply expect Dragon Age inquisition but with slavic creatures and legends, and the definition would certainly both, be perfect for said game, and unrepresentative of the witcher.
I think you may be confused here, we werent talking about the polygon review, the generic thing was said by the Bulletstorm/EthanCarter developer, who was responding to the Polygon review. He probably didnt mean to be negative against TW world, but he said what he said.
Last edited:
