I was really looking forward to walking around Vizima in the Witcher 3. The nostalgia that I would have felt would be priceless.
- Status
I don't think you're in a position to tell moderators what they should or should not allow on these boards. Nor what other members should or should not post.
Leave moderating to the moderators, thank you.
Eh I kind of assumed it would be restricted. Playing as Ciri, going to Vizima, Kaer Morhen... I never really thought you'd have complete freedom in those respects and it was always going to be story restricted.
It was pretty unlikely they were going to sit and re-create tons of Vizima when they've already got Kaer Morhen, Kaer Trolde, Novigrad, Oxenfurt and the entire rest of the giant open world to create.
It would have been nice, absolutely, I still share the sadness and it would have been a good excuse to bring back some old tunes 1 for 1. However I think it's not really surprising and hopefully what we'll see of Vizima will still be awesome.
What spoilers and presumption? If you don't like spoilers or get to know info about the gameworld and game, the forum of that game and especially the thread on interviews and article are the last place to visit then.
Nothing in that post is spoilery or him asuming things. You don't have to read the articles posted here, but don't visit this interview thread and then complain there are spoilers and info on the game.
Well, it was to be expected. A least I expected that. They have lots of new locations to show. Recreating Vizima would have been too much of work cosidering the size of the city. Actually I am really glad they included Vizima and Kaer Morhen at all - based on fan feedback or they just felt doing it, doesn't matter. But they did!
Time to move on
Yes...but a quest works without a quest marker only if you had developed enough reading stuff.
In principle...I hate those noob friendly stuff. The fact that you can turn it off is a good compromise, but it works only if there is another way to understand the quest line and your objective.
In Inquisition...There's nothing beyond the quest markers. What I mean is...if Bioware or some modders will add a tool or an option to remove them in the future, quests in no way can be approached.
So my hope is that REDs have developed quest design without quest marker in mind.
You're saying there's a chance that CDProjekt through negligence have allowed areas of the game to be unplayable by unchecking a tickbox?
You must be joking.
Last edited:
Aw shucks, it would've been cool with an animation for sitting down in taverns.
What concerns me most is all their beating around the bush with the 30fps target for PC. Either they're trying not to hurt console users' feelings or the game is just badly optimized. And apparently the issue of which settings this is meant to be on still can't be cleared up.
What concerns me most is all their beating around the bush with the 30fps target for PC. Either they're trying not to hurt console users' feelings or the game is just badly optimized. And apparently the issue of which settings this is meant to be on still can't be cleared up.
Well, after all, they've got to keep Geralt on the move: no rest for the Witcher.
Of course, but your previous response seem to have already decided that they didnt have good quest descriptions.
Theyve said that recommended is targeted for high settings @1080p/30fps. The reason for the confusion is that the dev says that it may run even better once optimization is done.
So they yanked permadeath now? Good news for me then. I wanted to play Dark without it.
I hope it's true.
The problem I have with that article though, is that I don't think it came from new interviews, they've just stitched together info from past interviews, and made some assumptions. We know at least one is incorrect, based on what REDS have said here:
So is everything else accurate? As far as the permadeath is concerned, it could be correct, or it could be that they pulled the info from an interview dated before the permadeath was mentioned.
The problem I have with that article though, is that I don't think it came from new interviews, they've just stitched together info from past interviews, and made some assumptions. We know at least one is incorrect, based on what REDS have said here:
Well, actually it HAS been confirmed, and it won't.
So is everything else accurate? As far as the permadeath is concerned, it could be correct, or it could be that they pulled the info from an interview dated before the permadeath was mentioned.
Last edited:
Just guessing, but I suspect not. As I said, I don't think it was a new interview, they just decided it would be useful to consolidate what they already had into a FAQ.
Yes, but it's still baffling how this is the target for cards that are much, much more powerful than the cards on consoles. And it would've been nice if they could've just said "Oh, this is with high AA enabled and some other demanding options" or if it's not.
Anyway, back on topic.
- Status