Future of the Witcher Games

[gedierond]

I think it´s a good idea, as long as the customization of your character has some limits.

I think a good story-driven game can be made with some level of main character customization, but the general background of your character should be set. So, it´s OK if you play as a custom witcher, as long as it´s always a witcher, with that fixed background of being a witcher. Don´t let me choose to play as a mage, a Knight of the Flaming Rose, a Squirrel or a Temerian soldier...
In order to have a good fleshed out main character, which I think is important for a good story, the background of this character should be well established. Otherwise, you have Skyrim (which is fine, but not CDPR´s style, I think).

That´s my view, at least.

 

[KingHochmeister]

I hate to say it, but ending the series on a high note is a great idea.

However, if CDPR are willing to explore more of the Witcher world, I am more than happy to buy them

 

[volsung]

@eliharel

Yeah I guess The Nameless One is a complete cardboard cutout because, well, he doesn't have a (full) voice. Same goes for centuries worth of literature.

Not all games have to be like soap operas. Popularity does not equal quality.

 

[sidspyker]

Universe is too good to be abandoned completely but I have no issue with them taking a break...even if it's a big one, just as long as they don't "can" it.

(Also no Geralt, no Witcher)

 

[Dprelate]

How about a game centered around the viper school. playing as one of Letho's old colleagues. who is now trying to reestablish his school in the aftermath of TW3.

 

[EliHarel]

Yeah I guess The Nameless One is a complete cardboard cutout because, well, he doesn't have a (full) voice. Same goes for centuries worth of literature.

Not all games have to be like soap operas. Popularity does not equal quality.

No need to so thoroughly take what I wrote out of context. My former post didn't deal in absolutes - I never said that there's never any depth or emotional attachment to any character who isn't voiced, whether fully or just partially. My post is neither summarized by "Mass Effect is popular, hence quality, hence CDPK should copy them", nor does it say all games have to be like soap operas (what... where did that... huh?). Literature is a different medium for storytelling - it all works solely on your imagination, and the protagonist isn't alone in the reader's inability to sense, so there's no great contrast. Comparing them is problematic - they're two different fields.

All I said is that voice acting for a protagonist in video games is a great way to make the players care even more about things. I didn't say it's the only way, or the best one, but simply a very good way. I'll be very surprised if someone (honestly, and not just to be argumentative) prefers a mute protagonist over a talking one. And not mute in the sense that the character is taciturn, or took a vow of violence, since that's a story aspect, but because there simply isn't a voice-actor for the lines - which is a technical aspect. Since BioWare proved that technically and production-wise it's possible, and as long as people agree that the protagonist should receive as much care as the other characters (who wouldn't want that...?), companies should now continue to stick to this high standard.

 

[Aes Sídhe]

Damn @Black Leopard; thats a great idea !

Gotta love the creativity of this forums dwellers

 

[Dprelate]

@Kudos; thanks mate.:cheers:

 

[shawn_kh]

@volsung84
Well then the Witcher turns into Dragon Age. Why would we need another Dragon Age when there is already a established Dragon Age series. Some may say the Witcher universe is different, but is it ? If you take Geralt and Witchers out of the Witcher game, it basically is like any other RPG set in ancient times. I play the Witcher because it is different from Skyrim and Dragon Age, and honestly because of Geralt and him being a Witcher which is different and interesting. Another point is if you create your own sorcerer and play, then the game shouldn't be called "The Witcher" any more, it should be called "The Sorcerer" or another random name.
Most of you guys seem to forget that we love the Witcher series, well because it's the Witcher. Because it's different from Dragon Age and Elder Scrolls series. Because it's unique. So I think CDPR should keep it the way it is.

 

[anisa1273]

how about story . from a saga ? , ( we may play ciri ;P ) . or the other hand a school.of the viper their also have a.cat .and griffin . that not be a fully mention or even exploring ,

am believe geralt is not the only witcher in the universe . their should have a new character as a witcher to exploring their own school & exploring the world . with a full new story ...

 

[shiek200]

@volsung84
Some may say the Witcher universe is different, but is it? If you take Geralt and Witchers out of the Witcher game, it basically is like any other RPG set in ancient times.

No offense, but you couldn't be more wrong. The wonderful thing about the witcher universe is that it doesn't simply stop at the Lore. It's a world of greys and hazy lines, where the right choice is as vague and elusive as who the real monsters are. The books captured this long before CDPR made their game. Don't get me wrong, they are amazing devs and captured the essence of the books (I believe) almost flawlessly, but it wasn't their idea, it was an inherent trait of the universe presented in the books. Dragon Age, and to many degrees Skyrim, are very traditional high fantasy, Good vs Evil. Nothing wrong with that, in fact, the cliché is rather comforting at times, but that's the exact opposite of the Witcher, and if you take the Witchers and Geralt himself out of the series, that doesn't change at all. Besides that though, bearing my idea in mind, there would still be witchers, and in my idea you would still be playing as one (as once upon a time, there were many, 3 schools-worth, I believe), and the universe would still contain all the wonderful grey areas and morally ambiguous choices lacking in all the aforementioned series'. It would still be every bit as unique, and it would still be what CDPR is known for, you'd simply have a little more say in who your character is exactly, rather than a character with an already extensive history.

Also, keep in mind that my idea wasn't intended to be a concrete, absolute "This is EXACTLY how the next game should be!" But rather a general idea. It could be the story about how one of the other Witcher School leaders came into his position, as that wasn't very talked about in the books, nor the games, so minus some anecdotes here and there, their stories are largely ours, and CDPR's for the making. That's just one other idea, there are dozens, but the general concept is to take a character that hasn't been fully developed yet, and let us as players develop them, through the course of a game that brings the same level of story telling and immersion that CDPR is so wonderful at providing.

 

[shawn_kh]

@shiek200
I consider Skyrim to be an open world game and not an RPG, because decision making in that game is suited for 10 year olds. If you play through Dragon Age 2 you'll see many hazy and gray areas, for example the Qunari section or templars vs mages. Plus if you see Inquisition's gameplay you'll see they will give players the option to save the village and risk the life of their followers in the keep, or vice versa. Again there are conflicts between different races in Dragon Age just like in the Witcher, and both are modeled after the real world. We see conflict between different races in our societies even today.
And lastly if you believe the Witcher Books captured it the best, then I'd like to remind you that there is a reason Andrzej Sapkowski chose Geralt, Ciri, Yen, Dandelion, Zoltan, Triss, and so on to be the main characters in the World he created. The story of the books revolves around the predefined back stories and characteristics of these characters. How they are bonded together and to what lengths they go for each other in his hazy and cold world.
So I believe CDPR should not mess with that element, because I really believe that these characters make the books and so far the games. If they are going to make another game then the protagonist should either be Geralt, Ciri, Eskel, Lambert, or Vesemir. And I did not include Yen or Triss because the game is called "The Witcher", and not "The Sorceress".

 

[The_Surgeon]

Sapkowski is releasing a prequel series about Geralts earlier adventures so I guess they could rock that
But honestly I want them to move on, a prequel book series is pretty sick but the games cant really do much there
Unless they are able to piece together Geralts early life with Sapkowski, the game series is done. At least fot Geralt's story.

I dont think another story in that universe is really worth it... unless they expand on the trio that formed at the end of the Witcher book series. Boreas Mun, the expert tracker, Sigismund Djirska, the famous spy, and Iron Wolf Isengrim, the elven outlaw. If I rember correctly, they were heading east in search of new lives.

 

[Nucta.397]

Ь

I kind of would like a basic Isometric game that could have a party of adventures with rtwp combat, Classes Include,. Witcher, Knight, Mage, Squirrel(basically a ranger) Defender, Alchemist(healer and damage) Bard (of course) Priest etc...... Whatever works......they could give it to one of their newer samller studios to get those devs ready for the big time......Just a thought.....

I like your idea, my thoughts are quite close to yours.
I was thinking about big, open-world RPG (after W3 and Cyberpunk CDPR will have plenty of experience).

Name: something in Elder Speech sounding good and mysterious.
Hero: totally not a chosen one, not Dovakin, just an ordinary representative of his/her class.
Main goal: establish themselves as masters of their profession.
Classes:
Witcher ( from the School of Serpent - because other schools are closed, guys only) = spellsword, spells are Witcher signs.
Sorserer (girls start in Aretuza, guys in Ban Ard) = strong mage with aggressive spells
Scoia'tael (elf, starts in Dol Blatanna) = archer
Knight (starts with Order of Flaming Rose, guys only) = heavy warrior
Mercenary (both sexes, are hired in Novigrad) = versatile warrior
Priestess of Melitele (starts in Ellander, in Temple of Melitele, girls only) = healer, conjurer
Scholar (starts in Oxenfurt) = noncombatant hero, uses speech, sets traps, alchemic skills, a bard
Squad leader (dwarf from Mahakam, gus only) = warrior, smith
Salamandra (starts in a hidden Salamandra liar) = thief, alchemist
Spy (starts as an agent of intelligence service) = undercover work

+ some clever plot
+ skill system
+ hero voice

You think it's a secondary issue? The voice-acting, that is, for the protagonist. ... Giving the main character a voice, simple as it may sound, is a major condition for the players to grow emotionally attached to the protagonist in particular, and the world in general. A voice may seem like something very generic, but without it, players are much more likely to be detached from things.

Yes!
I love Skyrim and I understand that Bethesda didn't want to waste a small fortune on voice-acting, but... playing voiceless hero is frustrating.

 

[The_Surgeon]

I really do not want them to ruin the Witcher saga with an online game with a class system
I think that the Witcher is great because of the depth of Sapkowski's character and his personal story

 

[shiek200]

@shawn_kh, Honestly, I saw your point at first, but the more you explain yourself the less I agree with you. The STORY in the books was amazing because of the characters, but the world and the universe stood on its own. It's impressive specifically because it DOESN'T revolve around those characters, but rather they exist in a world that is evolving and moving on without them, and one of the main conflicts with the Witchers was that the world was getting to a point where it no longer needed them, and this is brought up time and time again. Furthermore, if you look at the "enemies" in the games and books, there really aren't any, save Letho, who is really barely worse than Iorveth, who is (depending on your choices) technically a good guy, and even Roche can be a total racist. Going back the first game, both sides were total dicks, so my opinion was that the Neutral path was the only way to not feel like I was condoning genocide or chaos, and even THAT ended up biting me in the ass to an extent. :SPOILER ALERT: Even the main enemy in the first game wasn't really evil, he truly believed he was helping people, and seeing as he was Alvin the entire time, and he was in large part molded by your decisions in the game, it makes it kind of hard to hate him.:END OF SPOILERS: Virtually every choice you make in the game is convoluted and murky, and never cut and dry.

Now take a look at Skyrim: Main enemy? Alduin. Why? Wants to kill EVERYTHING. Cut and dry good vs evil. Dragon Age: Main enemy? The Archdemon and the Darkspawn. Why? World domination and wants to kill everyone. Cut and dry good vs evil. YES there are some elements of grey area choices to be made, but PLENTY of games and books have done the same thing, whether rpgs or not, it was creating an entire world out of shades of grey that made The Witcher special. (at least that's one of many things).

The world of the witcher has SO many tiny little details in the books and in the games that are only ever glanced at or brushed over giving the impression of MUCH larger, living and breathing world full of history and lore that hasn't been explored. For example, Zebras are thought to be a myth by many people, and are hardly more believable in the Witcher Universe than a Golden Dragon. Tiny little details like that help to separate this universe from others, but the primary difference was that it was an entire world built on the idea that NOTHING in life is entirely good or evil, and nothing on the surface is the same once you get a little deeper. I think a world like that has SO much potential BEYOND Geralt and company, and I would LOVE to see more of this world and it's lore and history, and if ANYONE can pull it off and still have it be the work of art it is, CDPR has proven their worth. I won't ask you to agree that there should be another game, but the world of the Witcher extends far beyond Geralt and his companions, that's just all we've seen thus far, and personally, I want to see more.

 

[shiek200]

@The Surgeon
Dear god, please, no class system, EVER. I HATE class systems in all games, lol. It's an awful way to limit the player. My whole idea revolves around developing our character as we play, otherwise we might as well just describe them in this forum and be done with it.
In response to everyone wanting an isometric game, I can see the appeal, and I don't think it's the WORST idea ever, but I really don't want to see a Baldur's Gate or Skyrim Clone in the Witcher world, I want to see a true-to-form Witcher game with all the characterization and depth we've come to love, from the wonderful devs we've come to love, just with a character I get to develop much further, deeper and more personally than in the last 3.

 

[soldiergeralt]

with cp2077 coming up, they're probably done with witcher for the time being. a good thing too. why milk it on a yearly basis like ea or ubisoft does with their crappy games? it takes time to develop new ideas.

 

[Demut]

Depending on how Cyberpunk 2077 turns out I’d rather have them focus on that franchise But I guess this is an idea that they could keep in mind for some project in the future.

 

[shiek200]

with cp2077 coming up, they're probably done with witcher for the time being. a good thing too. why milk it on a yearly basis like ea or ubisoft does with their crappy games? it takes time to develop new ideas.

Already said I definitely DON'T want a yearly game, I'd be satisfied with just the one more, even if it comes a few years from now, I just hope they're not done completely, as there's a lot of untapped potential. Don't even need to milk it to get into that. =P