Is it true that TW4 is aimed at new players?

[cyberpunkforever]

Hi

after the disappointment cp2077 was, I have to ask
is this true?

I love the witcher trilogy, played each one on release

 

[SigilFey]

Title edited for clarity.

Can't say for sure, though I imagine that headline is oversimplifying the concept. Obviously, with such a deep and extensive backstory (books and games) they're going to build on that. I think, if anything, the statement was meant to address the gameplay approach. In other words, if players are unfamiliar with prior Witcher titles, they'll be able to jump in here without having to learn the mechanics from the past games or feel lost in the world. (Those who do know will still probably be in for some treats and surprises.)

 

[Toyen]

The devs said in recent interviews that it is aimed at both new as well as returning players.

Of course after the lack of continuation between Witcher 2 and 3 (literally almost nothing you did in TW2 mattered in the end except perhaps letting Letho live) I do not have high expectations in this regard. As much as I would love to see several references to multiple choices from all of the previous games.

The goal of every business is to grow so of course they are trying to expand the fanbase and accommodate new players while not discarding the old.

The key here is to find the balance which unfortunately did not happen with the transition from TW2 to TW3.
I really felt like TW3 was very accommodating to newcomers while discarding most of the choices from previous games.

I'm hopeful the transition from TW3 to TW4 is better but I'm being realistic here.

Still super excited regardless.

 

[Rawls]

Why wouldn't they aim for new players and people who haven't previously played their games?

I sincerely doubt that means "at the expense of people who have played their games." Trying to reach a wider audience is a logical choice for a video game company.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

I think it will be a bit like TW3
You really don't need to have played the previous games to jump into the game. Even if you did, the experience will likely be way better. It's not every studios try to do?

 

[TeamLucy]

As in new players only? I don't think so

 

[Draconifors]

Why wouldn't they aim for new players and people who haven't previously played their games?

I sincerely doubt that means "at the expense of people who have played their games." Trying to reach a wider audience is a logical choice for a video game company.

This.

It only makes sense to try to reach new players, in addition to existing ones. What business doesn't want to get more customers?
It would be dumb to forget about the huge group that is current players, and CDPR aren't dumb.

Maybe there will be recaps of what has happened in previous stories, or maybe events in previous stories won't have a huge role. A more easily approachable a game, in other words.

 

[Garrison72]

Notice how Asian developers never say this crap? They make the game they want to and expect gamers to meet them where they're at. They never design anything for 'newcomers'. CDPR used to be this way with TW1 and TW2. Gone are those days.

 

[GrimReaper801]

Notice how Asian developers never say this crap? They make the game they want to and expect gamers to meet them where they're at. They never design anything for 'newcomers'. CDPR used to be this way with TW1 and TW2. Gone are those days.

First, as @Rawls said, this is totally normal and something literally every company wants and tries to do. You can't grow without attracting new players.

Secondly, yes, Asian developers do the same. All companies do.

Final Fantasy 16 Successfully Expanded the Series to New, Younger Players, Says Square Enix | Push Square

And with that approach, you naturally start to gravitate towards attracting new players — people who have never necessarily been sold on Final Fantasy's more traditional gameplay.

Third, you didn't think this argument through. The Witcher 1 wasn't designed for newcomers? It's the very first game CDPR made. No one had played any of their games prior. Because there were none. By definition, the whole point was to design a game that would attract new players (they all would be anyway) and people who had never heard of them, which was likely all of us. Why do you think the second game was so different if it wasn't to attract new players from a wider audience? If the whole point was to appeal to the core audience they had built with the first game, it would have been largely the same game. It's also very unlikely CDPR would still be here if they had done that.

Developers are constantly trying to attract new players and that's completely normal.

Lastly, has anyone bothered to track down the article? And more importantly, it's source? Because the source is an interview with IGN and it's clear this author chose very specific quotes from the interview to fear monger.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

First, as @Rawls said, this is totally normal and something literally every company wants and tries to do. You can't grow without attracting new players.

Seriously, every studio do it. It's not something special...
From an interview about Kingdom Come Deliverance 2 :

"We crafted the story of the sequel from its inception in such a way that it also stands on its own and makes it easy for new players to jump right in, and we’re gently reminding players of the major plot points from the first game through natural exposition in the first several hours," says Ziegler.

How weird it would be for a studio to announce something like this :

"Well, to play our brand new game, you must have played our three previous games, because otherwise you won't understand anything at all. Have fun!!!"

 

[pinoko]

TW3 is a game released a decade ago.
So CDPR "must" approach new gamers who were so young when TW3 came out.

IMO TW3 given kudos by gamers all over the world was a huge success because CDPR satisfied them all in the end: those who were familiar with the Sapcowski's work, those who didn't know the original novel but had been playing since TW1, and those who played the franchise for the first time with TW3 - all of these gamers enjoyed TW3.
So seeking new audiences is not necessarily a bad thing unless it means they pay little attention to the seasoned players. Of course, some developers have failed at that, aiming new customers and renouncing their own goodness of the product. It remains to be seen sure, but for now I'm optimistic in this regard.

 

[CiriusBlack]

I think, if anything, the statement was meant to address the gameplay approach. In other words, if players are unfamiliar with prior Witcher titles, they'll be able to jump in here without having to learn the mechanics from the past games or feel lost in the world.

I think it will be a bit like TW3
You really don't need to have played the previous games to jump into the game.

Please correct me if I'm wrong (and most likely I remember at least the wording wrong, it has been few years...), but I'm remembering that back in the day when Witcher 3 was coming out, CDPR said that they wanted to name the game design the logo as Witcher III instead of Witcher 3, so that it wouldn't make you feel like you _have_ to play the previous games before you can play this. The logo reminds you more of claw marks or something, than actual number. Even though it also symbolizes the number 3.

I think it was a great idea. Specificly since the claw mark is also very on topic.

This time (at least at the moment) we seem to have somewhat clear numer 4 in the logo, but I assume many things can still change. Or they have some other reasons to do it like this now.

 

[Spockprime]

I certainly hope that they're trying to attract a new group of players. If they rely too much on us old-timers, they're going to run out of player base pretty soon. I didn't see the original quote from the developer, but there's nothing in the headline to suggest that CDPR is writing off any of the existing base, and there's no way that any CDPR dev would ever say such a thing.

The key is whether they alter the formula enough that they start losing the established base quicker than they gain new players. There's been a lot of debate about that for the past few days, but personally, I haven't seen anything that causes me the least bit of concern that they're deviating from what most of us enjoy. Thus, I can only see this as a positive.

 

[AvarageEnjoyer]

I certainly hope that they're trying to attract a new group of players. If they rely too much on us old-timers, they're going to run out of player base pretty soon. I didn't see the original quote from the developer, but there's nothing in the headline to suggest that CDPR is writing off any of the existing base, and there's no way that any CDPR dev would ever say such a thing.

I don't understand why some people fail to see it - there hasn't been a single successful franchise in history that catered only to the pre-existing audience. Even Mass Effect, a game purposefully designed as a trilogy, aimed to attract new players with every new installment. Most people who are now upset about reaching out to new audience would've probably never heard about Witcher games if devs didn't try to expand with every new title.

 

[devivre]

I mean, even a lot of the existing players will have forgotten quite a lot after several years and need refreshing.

Besides, it‘s the start of a new story, which is even less reason to not be welcoming to new players.

I know people like the to make a drama out of everything these days, but this seems very pointless to me.

 

[GrimReaper801]

They want a modern audience!

Right.

Some guy quoting an article that is blatantly using specific quotes and leaving out all of the context to push a specific narrative holds the truth.

This is fear mongering. That's all this is. Fear mongering to generate view (thus money) from a very specific audience. Like @devivre said, it's pointless drama for drama's sake because drama works.

You're playing right into this guy's agenda while simultaneously claiming CDPR are the ones with an agenda. The only difference is this guy's agenda suits you.

These men hide behind arguments that may seem reasonnable, like lore, but simultaneously claim Rockstar has failed them. Yet the only thing Rockstar did was announce a female protagonist. Can't hide behind lore there. It's clear the real reason has nothing to do with lore.

CDPR wants to attract new players. Big whoop. Every company wants that and, more importantly, needs that.

Y'all need to learn to take a step back, breath in, relax and wait for developers to release their game before crucifying them.

 

[Sardukhar]

Keep in mind, real world political posts are NOT ALLOWED here on the forums - and never have been. When posting, please keep such topics and responses away. Thank you!

 

[Tangsta]

I don't understand their goal here.

Getting rid of Geralt (their golden goose) was already a huge risk, but now they've decided to add extra risk by making controversial decisions. I'm starting to the see the rot from within the company, slowly poisoning CDPR. This is how a downfall starts, it's always something seemingly innocuous, then it festers over time and becomes something much more serious. Unless something is done soon, I think this is the beginning of the end for CDPR. I have seen it many times in other major brand names, like Bioware and Naughty Dog.

The fact their stated goal is to "chase a new audience", after TW3 sold more than 50 million units is a real head scratcher. So what, the 50 million gamers you already have is not good enough? That's an absolutely envious number for any game, why mess with a winning formula? Even if they bought back Geralt, they'd be lucky to retain most of that 50 million population, let alone retain them all AND add more to it. The sheer arrogance of their ambitions here is unbelievable. Growth in a new segment always comes at a cost. If you want a new audience then be ready to sacrifice a huge portion of that 50 million. Nothing is ever "free". You only make these types of changes if TW3 had sold poorly and the company was on the edge of bankruptcy, nothing could be further from the truth here.

If they don't want Geralt as the main character anymore, then it actually makes more sense to retire the entire Witcher brand altogether and move on. Geralt is 95% of the Witcher brand! So many head-scratching decisions from CDPR lately, this is no longer the company I love.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

I think this is the beginning of the end for CDPR.

You mean the same as "the end of CDPR", a studio that "noone care about anymore" that some announced after Cyberpunk?

 

[Draconifors]

CDPR wanting to reach additional players really is one of the most illogical reasons to be upset about with TW4.

It feels like many only read the headline, and with pure clickbait wordings like in the article linked in the OP... the result is completely unnecessary and even baseless outrage and complaining.