I think if there will be a clear profit from GOTY/Extended edition, they would release it. But i don't know their finance predictions, so there are just guesses.
Of course they would, but would that new edition be about "fixing" content in a major way ? A GOTY edition could be just the original game with all the patches, DLCs, and expansions in a single package at a better price, maybe with some small extras (including higher graphics settings on the upgraded consoles). Kind of like Skyrim's Legendary Edition. If I recall correctly, the possibility of a GOTY edition was indeed not excluded in one of the interviews from a few months ago.
Last edited:
I will try to find it, I think it was one of the developer interviews before Blood and Wine, although I do not remember exactly which one.
Edit: I found one here.
Last edited:
GOTY was just confirmed by Eurogamer:
http://www.eurogamer.pl/articles/2016-07-06-premiera-wiedzmina-3-w-wersji-game-of-the-year-juz-w-sierpniu-raport
Co what should we do to have the missing elements included in this one?
http://www.eurogamer.pl/articles/2016-07-06-premiera-wiedzmina-3-w-wersji-game-of-the-year-juz-w-sierpniu-raport
Co what should we do to have the missing elements included in this one?
I think that everything that could be said have already been said in this thread and couple others. We just have to hope that developers noticed them and decided to give us at least some of the things we wanted for this game.Cohonez said:
Last edited:
In the meantime don't expect any new content to come from this whatsoever until we hear otherwise from CDPR.
Here's hoping though of course.
You can always try but you wouldn't be the first. Maybe you will be luckier than us. In the meantime, there is one on Change.org https://www.change.org/p/cd-projekt-red-the-witcher-cutted-ends-ведьмак-обрубленные-концы
I'm all for more quests that take place within Novigrad if it's at all possible as part of GOTY edition. One of the things I kind of missed about the older non-open games is spending a long time in just one place without leaving it. So if adding a whole Iorveth quest line in Novigrad does that, then I'm all for it.
The thing is all the Iorveth related stuff in Novigrad was replaced in the final game, so there is really nothing to be restored there that is related to him. The biggest cut in Novigrad is definitely part of the final battle that supposed to take place in there,
The role he played in those events was replaced by other NPC's, for example instead of him telling Geralt about how to find King of Beggars, we have scavengers telling him that. All the events plays the exact same way as if he would be involved, thus in Novigrad plot there is no place for him left.
The scenes with the beggars and thieves could still be replaced again if the Iorveth content was really to be restored. But I agree that there might be more difficult cases where it is not obvious if restoring the cut version of a quest would not make it worse, or conflict with parts made after the cut, or just unnecessarily longer.
If anything, it would probably be much easier to add new/any other cut quest involving Iorveth rather than replace existing parts of the game by re-integrating him into those narratives. It has been mentioned here, I reckon, that there was supposed to be a line of sidequests about the Aen Sheide/elves that had him and another general (Insegrim?) involved. That storyline probably had a more substantial role for him anyway.
To clarify, it was a single sidequest, not a questline.
It all depends if the changes affected integral structure of the game or are simply the result of scope cutting AKA trimming the fat. The first ones are usually the effect of original concept evolving through development and those changes are so deeply rooted into game basis, they can't be restored to the original form without entire structure being redone to a massive extent. In case of scope cutting things are easier, since those are the parts removed due to time and money constraints, so things that they needed to compromise on in order to release the game at all. That's the type of content that could be restored much easier without breaking final structure of the game. I'm planning to write a lengthy post comparing game original structure to the one we have in the final game, but I have no idea when I'm going to release it, though I hope it will clarify many misconceptions about cut and changed content of The Witcher 3.
I really dont understand this mentality of : " they should have done this- they should add this - it would be easy to"
Things are cut from all games that come out. Huge things sometimes. With a gsme the size of Witcher there are going to be huge chunks left out. Its just how making games works.
Just becuase there are scrapz of code, references in the current code to things, concept art or even just deleted things does not mean A. It would be easy to ad things. B. They "should".
Remember the development of the game is over. They likely have a small team for testing/ fixing of bugs patches plus general maintennce left on the Witcher. The rest have probably been assigned tasks for their next games.
Im the end unless CD have promised thst something is in the game in its description then the have ZERO obligation to add anything. Whether its new or cut content. In the end its a buisness. We have payed money for what we got, they have fulfilled any and all obligations to you. They are continuing to patch the gsme as needed, which honestly some companies would have not botheelred by now. Its just how it is.
I would love more content. Heck id love more dlc. Witcher 3 may end up being my favourite game now insteadof Deus ex, havent made my mind up.
Things are cut from all games that come out. Huge things sometimes. With a gsme the size of Witcher there are going to be huge chunks left out. Its just how making games works.
Just becuase there are scrapz of code, references in the current code to things, concept art or even just deleted things does not mean A. It would be easy to ad things. B. They "should".
Remember the development of the game is over. They likely have a small team for testing/ fixing of bugs patches plus general maintennce left on the Witcher. The rest have probably been assigned tasks for their next games.
Im the end unless CD have promised thst something is in the game in its description then the have ZERO obligation to add anything. Whether its new or cut content. In the end its a buisness. We have payed money for what we got, they have fulfilled any and all obligations to you. They are continuing to patch the gsme as needed, which honestly some companies would have not botheelred by now. Its just how it is.
I would love more content. Heck id love more dlc. Witcher 3 may end up being my favourite game now insteadof Deus ex, havent made my mind up.
I guess the first type of cuts were made mostly to the 2013 version, at which time some of the quests may not even have been in production yet, or they are just poorly documented in the leaked files (e.g. "W3 ALPHA BUGS.xlsx" - this seems to be the most detailed for the quests it actually includes, but there is limited information in it about Act 3, and nothing about the Novigrad branch of Act 2). The story and quest structure in "W3 Quest Asset List.pdf" from June 2014 already looks more or less final, what was cut from that is probably for the second reason. Or possibly censorship in the case of Bald Mountain.
In case of Bald Mountain I kinda doubt the content was removed for censorship reasons. None of the animations for this section has been done by the time the most recent document came by. From what I recall they didn't remove just an orgy and ritualistic suicide, but also dancing around fire and throwing the items into it and I seriously doubt those turned out to be too hardcore (note how most of those animations were color coded red, which is used for a things cutted for scope cutting reasons). The most likely reason is the aforementioned scope cutting, since this section required a lot of unique animations and wasn't that crucial to the story, so when they started approaching deadline, all of that was completely dropped.
And to elaborate on first type of changes, most of them seem to be done in order to reduce the amount of "do something for me and I do something for you" in the main story. Here's example: in the initial concept of the game Crach would ask you to help Hjalmar first, before he gives you a permission to investigate cataclysm site. After you do so, you have to come back and then you find out that Cerys sailed to lift Udalryk's curse, so you have to help her, then you finally get permission from Crach. In the final game Crach gives you a permission right away and just ask you to help his children when you have a chance to do that, you can also decide who you wanna help first or at all. Turning those two main quests into the sidequests not only makes game structure less linear, but also make more sense for Crach's character (I mean he also obviously wants to help Ciri, so forcefully keeping Geralt and Yen like that from doing so would be a bit of a dick move). So as you can see, not every change from the original concept is for the worse.
Last edited: