Interviews Karolina Kuzia, Quest Designer...
Doesn't ask a single question about quest design. Yep, your typical interviewer., alright
- Status
Doesn't ask a single question about quest design. Yep, your typical interviewer., alright
Very much so.Good. This means long time fans and those deep into the lore will not get bored :victory:
Young'uns surely will pick up with utmost speed, captured by the magic that we all once felt
I wish every journalist was making that kind of statement, because that's the kind of comment that reassures me the plot and world will be just as deep and complex as ever, and all this "You don't need to know anything about The Witcher world to enjoy TW3" is just the usual PR fluff - the same that was made about TW2.
Or perhaps I shouldn't be doubting the (mighty) Blacha in the first place...
Well TW2 was really rough around the edges, it was pretty hard for a neophythe to feel involve. After reading feedbacks from prologue section I don't think that will be the case with TW3:
It's just that what will look like simple exposition for a newcomer will feel like proper fan-service for a longtime fan.
Last edited:
Personally I don't agree with the bolded, I've never subscribed to the notion that TW2 is "hard to understand" or "difficult to get into" (Or any variation on that).
But from what we've heard of the Prologue, your last line there is pretty much precisely what I'm expecting. Although I've also had my worry about other sections of the game, and certain factions or groups having their depth lessened, and it's statements like the one prior that go a long way to alleviating that fear. I wish there was more people saying the same.
Mea Culpa, I wasn't talking about TW2 as a whole but I was referring to the beginning of the game and the infamous prologue section, I felt that without any previous knowledgeof the lore it was a necessity to spend several minutes reading the codex to understand what the hell was happening during the siege of La Valette castle (who is Geralt, Triss, Foltest, Nilfgaard, The Scoia'tael, the deceased Demavend...)
What is interesting to me is that the last two immpresions of the game i read were that the W3 looks amazing and that is very believable (and one guy says that if you have a high end PC you are in for a treat), but on the other hand this guy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzHTz2GZOq8 said that everything in the game is great, except the graphic are not as good as he tought it would be, and that because of that the game doesnt feel believable as it could. So exactly opposite of what the first two said, why there is so much difference in opinion? Only clue is that since the guy who said it doesnt look so good, stated that game looks like it is on XBOX 360, so i think that he played on X1, and the guys who said graphics are great played it on PC.
I could be wrong, but I had to share my thoughts, I am really glad that they said it looks great.
I could be wrong, but I had to share my thoughts, I am really glad that they said it looks great.
Until we can judge for ourselves, on our own machines and systems, we must continue to speculate upon the confusing and changeable diversity of subjective, and relative reviews. Thankfully, soon it will end -- then people can be either as elated, or disappointed, as they see fit.
Since 99% of all journalists and players said that the game looks stunning in the graphics department (PC), I'm more inclined to believe that. The guy who said it looked almost like an X360 game probably:What is interesting to me is that the last two immpresions of the game i read were that the W3 looks amazing and that is very believable (and one guy says that if you have a high end PC you are in for a treat), but on the other hand this guy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzHTz2GZOq8 said that everything in the game is great, except the graphic are not as good as he tought it would be, and that because of that the game doesnt feel believable as it could. So exactly opposite of what the first two said, why there is so much difference in opinion? Only clue is that since the guy who said it doesnt look so good, stated that game looks like it is on XBOX 360, so i think that he played on X1, and the guys who said graphics are great played it on PC.
I could be wrong, but I had to share my thoughts, I am really glad that they said it looks great.
1) played on xbox one
2) Was expecting the game to look every single moment like the best scene in SOD, or like the order 1886, or Ryse or Ass Creed unity, and considers anything less not next gen.
Well fuck, if TW3 does indeed look like XB360 crap graphics, I'm going to be upset that I ever bought nextgen consoles. I doubt it will, but ugh... I could have used all that money to at least start building my first PC.What is interesting to me is that the last two immpresions of the game i read were that the W3 looks amazing and that is very believable (and one guy says that if you have a high end PC you are in for a treat), but on the other hand this guy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzHTz2GZOq8 said that everything in the game is great, except the graphic are not as good as he tought it would be, and that because of that the game doesnt feel believable as it could. So exactly opposite of what the first two said, why there is so much difference in opinion? Only clue is that since the guy who said it doesnt look so good, stated that game looks like it is on XBOX 360, so i think that he played on X1, and the guys who said graphics are great played it on PC.
I could be wrong, but I had to share my thoughts, I am really glad that they said it looks great.
I just don't know what to do at this point, because that Nvidia Shield thingy sounds pretty cool. Then again it kinda sucks, because it's always online and no mods and it's controller is not what I want. Then again... is it worth spending another $200 bucks, plus a subscription fee to play TW3 all maxed out at 60fps when it's available.
Fuck, Fuck,Fuck You All and... Me!!! lol....
I just don't know what to do yet, because at this point, I cannot just go buy some super computer Alienware 51.
Also, I don't want my first impressions of TW3 to look like crap on XB1 or PS4.
Shit #@&$%#!!! Okay, okay, perhaps I need to just go relax, meditate and have a tall glass of red wine.
Stop laughing at me... lol
Last edited:
Exactly, my dilema.
$200 bucks to me aint much, so odds are I'm going to try this thing out
Last edited:
That seems to be the most reasonable explanation. Out of the dozens of January previews and the handful we've gotten out of PAX, the only people who have expressed discontent with the graphics are those who played on Xbox One... one guy who played the game on both said the difference was "night and day". Which could explain why there is such a contrast of opinions.What is interesting to me is that the last two immpresions of the game i read were that the W3 looks amazing and that is very believable (and one guy says that if you have a high end PC you are in for a treat), but on the other hand this guy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzHTz2GZOq8 said that everything in the game is great, except the graphic are not as good as he tought it would be, and that because of that the game doesnt feel believable as it could. So exactly opposite of what the first two said, why there is so much difference in opinion? Only clue is that since the guy who said it doesnt look so good, stated that game looks like it is on XBOX 360, so i think that he played on X1, and the guys who said graphics are great played it on PC.
I could be wrong, but I had to share my thoughts, I am really glad that they said it looks great.
Then again, who knows? Just look at how fan reactions have differed on the exact same material. Some people are completely blown away and others have said it barely looks better than skyrim or last gen GTAV.
I don't want the future to be that Netflix-like cr**... I want to own my games. I want physical versions. I want to play offline if need be... If this become standard I m glad Witcher 3 will be released before. So does MGS V. If that happens, I ll never go on next gen. Damn that scares me to see CDPR defend that thing that is totally opposite to their philosophy....Well I mean of course it's great for casual gamers... But not for me. I consider myself as an hardcore gamer and I don't have this detached relationship to my favorite games. And I don't want it.Exactly, my dilema.
$200 bucks to me aint much, so odds are I'm going to try this thing out
Dammit i already spent my money on a PS4 ><. Oh well my internetv connection dies out from time to time so atleast i wouldnt have tgo worry about that on my PS4.
once you start playing i bet you'll forget about the graphics in 1 hour. Also, it doesnt look like x360 graphics, thats an incredible exaggeration.Well fuck, if TW3 does indeed look like XB360 crap graphics, I'm going to be upset that I ever bought nextgen consoles. I doubt it will, but ugh... I could have used all that money to at least start building my first PC.
I just don't know what to do at this point, because that Nvidia Shield thingy sounds pretty cool. Then again it kinda sucks, because it's always online and no mods and it's controller is not what I want. Then again... is it worth spending another $200 bucks, plus a subscription fee to play TW3 all maxed out at 60fps when it's available.
Fuck, Fuck,Fuck You All and... Me!!! lol....
I just don't know what to do yet, because at this point, I cannot just go buy some super computer Alienware 51.
Also, I don't want my first impressions of TW3 to look like crap on XB1 or PS4.
Shit #@&$%#!!! Okay, okay, perhaps I need to just go relax, meditate and have a tall glass of red wine.
Stop laughing at me... lol
You can look again the MS conference footage if you like, or the PS4 screenshots, I think the game looks really good, wouldnt worry about it if it was me the one playing it in consoles
Even on the XB1, I wouldn't believe the game will look so bad as to be considered a "360 game", that's just some really extreme hyperbolic BS far as I'm concerned, all the next-gen releases have shown that, there's differences but not as big. I wouldn't worry. This is exactly the point where you must question the credibility(if any) of people who make such statements, what knowledge (or lack thereof) they possess as to make such statements.
We already saw what the game looks like on the XB1 at E3, and it looked great, I was especially surprised when I learnt it was on the XB1.
That game doesn't even look good 90% of the time, 5% is the interiors+cutscenes which are always good and the other 5% is when those rare moments happen where everything clicks and creates a pretty picture.The rest of the time it generally looks pretty terrible.
We already saw what the game looks like on the XB1 at E3, and it looked great, I was especially surprised when I learnt it was on the XB1.
:rly?:
That game doesn't even look good 90% of the time, 5% is the interiors+cutscenes which are always good and the other 5% is when those rare moments happen where everything clicks and creates a pretty picture.The rest of the time it generally looks pretty terrible.
Yep, that's what I'm saying to a point. It's a fine line, yes I want to play offline too when I want. Serious...
I used to be all about having a disc, but you know what, I found going digital is better in a lot of ways. #1 less trash/polution/money fucking up our awesome planet Earth. #2 you can infact play digital downloaded games offline. #3 It's more silent on the console. #4 The game loads faster. #5 you never have to worry about your disc getting scratched or worn. #6 Devs save money that can help fund new games like CP2077. #7 You don't have to get up out of your chair to change discs for each game you want to play. #8 You buy it once, you will always own it. It is the future bro
Last edited:
- Status