Is TW3 getting downgraded for the sake of consoles?

[EmperorZorn]

Exclusive titles are horrible. I'm strictly against locking other people out from enjoying a game.

But at the same time I don't want my PC experience to suffer from a multi-platform release.
I don't want a dumbed down version of what a game would have been.

 

[shinobi2u]

If CDPR wants to survive as a company, probably not. Not to mention, if they want to larger and even more ambitious games. It ain't cheap.

This. They are growing more and more which means they need more revenue. The console generation is new and allows them to expand on visuals. I mean, look at how good Witcher 2 looked (and still looks) and they did a very successful port to 360. This is a new generation of consoles and it looks great from what they have shown, plus the world is so much bigger.

And even if they were making it just for PC, they don't want to make it inaccessible to anyone except those with high end PCs. It's their call in the end, and I am sure they are trying to balance being a business and satisfying the customers/fans as much as they can (though there will always be those who are unhappy with certain things).

 

[JackieEstacado]

Not everyone can afford to buy/build a gaming PC.
It would have been a pity if TW3 was developed only for PC and not for Ps4 and XboxOne, because a lot of people would have lost the chance to play it.
As far as all the versions are polished and accurate, I don't see where is the problem.
I understand that graphically speaking the game could have been "really next-gen", but in the end 3D games get visually older in a worse way than 2D games, so the astonishment of the great graphics lasts for a short period of time. After that span, a game will be remembered not for being eye-candy, but for its gameplay and freshness.
Even if technically it's not the best the market can offer, I'm sure that TW3 will be a gameplay and narrative masterpiece and will set new standards in the rpg world, if not in the whole gaming industry.

 

[Mgec]

As much as I love PC gaming, exclusiveness would hurt the franchise more I think. CDPROJEKT needs the money and they have said that they will make the most out of each platform.

 

[gregski]

@prince_of_nothing - thread merged as the deliberations seem to be similar in nature.

 

[thislsmadness]

I don't think it would have been a better game. Slightly more polished, at best. Two reasons:

1. While PS4/Xbox are no where near as powerful as a high end PC, they are still more capable than the low end PCs CDPR will target, which means there doesn't have to be any compromises in the game's design. Even porting to the new machines is much more straight forward than it ever has been.

2. When you start talking about limiting the potential audience for a game, you're also talking about a more limited budget. If CDPR wasn't targeting the console audience there would probably be less financial risk, which would mean a game of smaller scope and scale. Those types of exclusives work fine on console since the console manufactures are often making up the difference, publishing, and co-marketing the game. On PC, you don't have anyone to lean on in that way and so there is almost no benefit for a "AAA" game to stay exclusive to PC.

 

[Mataresa]

PC first, everything else after. And I think they will do that. (I hope they learned from TW2 and make some improvemtns, especially UI.) Go for the (potentially) strongest platform and then go downwards from there. This way you assure, that every hardware is used the best way and to the most potential. I wouldn't want consoleros to miss out, even if I feel, that this is a PC game at the heart and that a PC would be the better experience. But I am a PC only gamer and I have to respect other opinions.

 

[Mataresa]

Not everyone can afford to buy/build a gaming PC.
It would have been a pity if TW3 was developed only for PC and not for Ps4 and XboxOne, because a lot of people would have lost the chance to play it.

You can get equivalent hardware to consoles for a pc for roughly the same price in most countries that I know. (Usually you already have a screen/TV, audio system, keyboard and mouse. And if oyu only need to upgrade some parts of your older (work) machine, it might be even cheaper.) Main difference is preference. Do you just want something out of the box or something you need to set up once.

 

[prince_of_nothing]

If CDPR wants to survive as a company, probably not. Not to mention, if they want to make larger and even more ambitious games. It ain't cheap.

I don't think the notion that going multiplatform is always going to be financially prudent is correct. Look at Crytek for instance. They went multiplatform and now they are facing bankruptcy.. When you go multiplatform, you can make more money sure. But development costs, risks and responsibilities also increase substantially as well..

Making PC games is trickier though, because PC gamers tend to have higher standards and more refined tastes than console gamers; mostly because the average PC gamer is older than the average console gamer.. But if you get the formula right, then PC gaming can be extremely profitable. Just look at Blizzard. They are raking in the dough with Wow.

 

[Garrison72]

Creatively speaking, any title is better off being PC only. The console market is there to make money, not to experiment.

 

[JackieEstacado]

You can get equivalent hardware to consoles for a pc for roughly the same price in most countries that I know. (Usually you already have a screen/TV, audio system, keyboard and mouse. And if oyu only need to upgrade some parts of your older (work) machine, it might be even cheaper.) Main difference is preference. Do you just want something out of the box or something you need to set up once.

Mmm... I don't think a high end PC is as cheap as consoles. And if I have to buy a system that is equal to consoles, then I prefer consoles, also because I would miss their exclusives doing otherwise.

 

[moonknightgog]

Mmm... I don't think a high end PC is as cheap as consoles. And if I have to buy a system that is equal to consoles, then I prefer consoles, also because I would miss their exclusives doing otherwise.

But buying a console, you'll miss all PC exclusives.

 

[Thebull94]

You can get equivalent hardware to consoles for a pc for roughly the same price in most countries that I know. (Usually you already have a screen/TV, audio system, keyboard and mouse. And if oyu only need to upgrade some parts of your older (work) machine, it might be even cheaper.) Main difference is preference. Do you just want something out of the box or something you need to set up once.

You cannot get a PC for $350-399 with the same specs. I have debated this with countless others before. The price always ends up at around $450-500. Which while that might sound appealing, the fact is that PC will not last as long as the consoles of this generation.

I really don't get the whole (not saying you made this claim, just making a statement) "my $700-1000+ PC" can outrun your $350-400 Console (PS4/Xbox One), as if stating the obvious is meant to mean something, lol.

"But buying a console, you'll miss all PC exclusives."

Works both ways mate. Also, it is no secret that the recent barrage of console exlcusives (primarily, PS3/4 and Wii / WIiU franchises) are more critically acclaimed and successful than PC exclusives (Going purely by units sold / Metacritic and awards, etc) that have released in the passed few years.. The main game I play on my PC as of now (not that this is a bad thing, the game fucking rocks) is Garrys Mod. Whereas on my PS3 (and PS4 when more games such as Uncharted 4 etc come out) I had Uncharted 3, Last of US, God of War and MGS4 (Soon to be MGSV, I am fucking pumped) along with the console exclusives that were limited only to the PS360 such as Red Dead Redemption etc.

 

[randyrhoads]

But buying a console, you'll miss all PC exclusives.

And become a console peasant

 

[dragonbird]

And become a console peasant

There's been enough inflammatory posts already in this thread. Don't start it up again.

 

[Vincentdante]

Creatively speaking, any title is better off being PC only. The console market is there to make money, not to experiment.

Yeah... no. I can name some console games that outshine many PC exclusives in creativity.

 

[randyrhoads]

Yeah... no. I can name some console games that outshine many PC exclusives in creativity.

I'm still mad RDR didn't come to PC

 

[Thebull94]

Yea, it was kinda BS (even though I bought it on PS3), they should have still made the game for PC considering (imo) it was easily one of the highlights of last generation in terms of console gaming AND PC gaming, that shouldn't have been missed out by any form of gamer.

 

[JackieEstacado]

But buying a console, you'll miss all PC exclusives.

You are perfectly right, but I prefer console exclusives.
Fortunately a dear friend of mine is a PCist, so I can play at his house the few games that I like on PC.
We have beaten The Witcher 2 together.

Anyway, I understand your preference: The Witcher 2 played on the highest settings is on another planet visually, compared to the Xbox conversion.
In the end both of our choices are reasonable, with their pros and cons.

 

[Mataresa]

You cannot get a PC for $350-399 with the same specs. I have debated this with countless others before. The price always ends up at around $450-500. Which while that might sound appealing, the fact is that PC will not last as long as the consoles of this generation.

You are right, I thought in $ they were a bit more expensive still. But Then it depends on how many games you buy and how you buy. For PC even on launch most games are cheaper and they get deeply discounted at some point. I would argue that the average player will spend less for gaming on PC, cause you upgrade your graphics cards every couple of years or sometimes replace another part and then save that money by buying cheaper games. But that all depends on customer behaviour.
Even if in the end you pay $100 more for your hardware. Compared to the total amount you pay for games I would argue, that it is not a lot (unless you only buy 3 games a year). Stating you cannot afford it in this case is probably not true. (Having to buy two games less in the 8 year life cycle seems to be not that tragic.)
But I don't want to convince anybody, since it is all due to preference and that is fine. But this is off topic and I will stop now.