[Mega SPOILERS] Immersion Destroyer.

+
I didn't read every previous thread so there may be a good argument for me somewhere, but I really hope CDPR will NOT spend any resource on creating a post-ending game world. The narrative ends, that's it. The entire post-ending open world is really just meant to let players do side quests we missed earlier.

Yes Skyrim has post-ending open world and that gives it replay value, but that's because player decisions matter preciously little in Skyrim, so its post-ending world does not need to look very different from the pre-ending one: blue coat guards in Solitude vs. red coat guards in Windhelm... one can easily do that. Witcher 3 is different. Player choices shape the entire fate of the world, so to make a post-ending world reflecting player choices is a huge undertaking, almost like making a Witcher 4.

The same resource could and should be used on some other much more urgent problems, such as the lack of closure in the ending slide show, the lack of closure for Geralt personally, and the rushed and underwhelming Act 3.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think most of the people who want a post-ending open world ACTUALLY want a satisfying closure to so many things/characters that are not well described in the game's vanilla ending. I support with both hands and feet for an expanded epilogue and a post-ending cutscene, which I think provides closure better than post-ending open world.

That is exactly what I posted a day ago. A better closure will certainly lessen this "endgame depression" if not entirely kill it. It might be a bit less costly too than an entirely new world state.
 
Alright, we know the 2 future paid expansions will not be post-ending, but instead will just add two whole new side quests separate from the main story.

Is this confirmed? I don't feel motivated to go back again in timeline after my second playthrough, To be honest, if this game is to be threated like a story-driven only, This was a great story and was a great game and ended, i'll wait for cyberpunk so. The gameplay is very nice but isn't so addicting to makes me replay after credits.
 
Last edited:
I didn't read every previous thread so there may be a good argument for me somewhere, but I really hope CDPR will NOT spend any resource on creating a post-ending game world. The narrative ends, that's it. The entire post-ending open world is really just meant to let players do side quests we missed earlier.

Yes Skyrim has post-ending open world and that gives it replay value, but that's because player decisions matter preciously little in Skyrim, so its post-ending world does not need to look very different from the pre-ending one: blue coat guards in Solitude vs. red coat guards in Windhelm... one can easily do that. Witcher 3 is different. Player choices shape the entire fate of the world, so to make a post-ending world reflecting player choices is a huge undertaking, almost like making a Witcher 4.

The same resource could and should be used on some other much more urgent problems, such as the lack of closure in the ending slide show, the lack of closure for Geralt personally, and the rushed and underwhelming Act 3.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think most of the people who want a post-ending open world ACTUALLY want a satisfying closure to so many things/characters that are not well described in the game's vanilla ending. I support with both hands and feet for an expanded epilogue and a post-ending cutscene, which I think provides closure better than post-ending open world.

You're not reading key points. I take it you're referring to my posts because of your Skyrim references. Please read the following bolded information if you'd like clarification.

Offer players of a post main story game play environment, reflecting all of Geralt's actions performed up to the very end of the last act. Have minimal impact on the state of the world by altering only the main characters knowledge of the events that unfolded. This is not to be confused with implementing a playable game world reflecting any of the epilogue slideshow events.

Story driven or not it, my suggestion including some others, has nothing to do with continuing the story from the epilogue. I am not suggesting they add more content for us to explore and unravel plot wise. The only story information that would be implemented is anything discerned via the main quest. This would be in the form of the main characters being placed in logical locations after recuperating from the events unfolding at the tower with Ciri entering it.

Here are some examples of some of the characters presence in a post game play world. Zoltan and Dandelion at the tavern, Triss or Yenn at Kaer Morhen in Geralt's quarters, and the rest of the world in a state they were in prior to the main story quest coming to a close. Ciri's fate could be a mystery at this point because we don't know how she returns in 2 of the 3 endings. Dialogue reflecting Ciri's absence could be a simple expression hoping for her return soon with positive spirits.

What I suggest is a simple alteration/addition just like you describe with
Yes Skyrim has post-ending open world and that gives it replay value, but that's because player decisions matter preciously little in Skyrim, so its post-ending world does not need to look very different from the pre-ending one: blue coat guards in Solitude vs. red coat guards in Windhelm... one can easily do that.
 
Is this confirmed? I don't feel motivated to go back again in timeline after my second playthrough, To be honest, if this game is to be threated like a story-driven only, This was a great story and was a great game and ended, i'll wait for cyberpunk so. The gameplay is very nice but isn't so addicting to makes me replay after credits.
kyeah, the story of the witcher Geralt has ended. wtf you want from us.
 
That is exactly what I posted a day ago. A better closure will certainly lessen this "endgame depression" if not entirely kill it. It might be a bit less costly too than an entirely new world state.

I feel like my suggestions would alleviate more of the players "endgame depression" over simply fleshing out the details of everyone's future through a slideshow or cut scene video. Players being able to immerse themselves in a game world that reflects everything they just unraveled through the main quest, I believe, would be enough to cure most's "endgame depression". Carrot on a stick in an open world. Repeatable and randomized witcher contracts, DLC content, REDkit player made content, etc. would all be a lot better in a game world that has closure to it. The events of the epilogue can be a fond reminder of events yet to unfold for them. They're playing in a world that takes place before the epilogue but in a world right after the main quest. It still feels alive.
 
Is this confirmed? I don't feel motivated to go back again in timeline after my second playthrough, To be honest, if this game is to be threated like a story-driven only, This was a great story and was a great game and ended, i'll wait for cyberpunk so. The gameplay is very nice but isn't so addicting to makes me replay after credits.

Yea, it was confirmed by Senior Writer Jakub Szamałek from CDPR in a interview with IGN:

As for the add-ons and expansions coming to The Witcher 3 following its release, Szamałek explained that "they’re within the story of the Witcher: Wild Hunt," running within the time frame, rather than after the ending.

Source: http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/04/29/ending-the-witcher-3-with-a-bang-ign-first
 
kyeah, the story of the witcher Geralt has ended. wtf you want from us.
Are you a RED or a modder?

This argument about story ended is very weak to me, the story ended many years ago when Geralt died in Lady of the Lake. And i didn't say the story ended, i said the game ended. Just to remember this is a game, not a book or a movie.
 
Are you a RED or a modder?
lol. that's what WE say on their future dlc. "The game has ended - wtf you want from us with your DLCs." )) The same manner they treat us - like, the story of the witcher geralt is over go f. yourself in the empty world. )))
I knew I will be misunderstood. )) Specifically came back to double check.
 
Originally Posted by Voldugen
Offer players of a post main story game play environment, reflecting all of Geralt's actions performed up to the very end of the last act. Have minimal impact on the state of the world by altering only the main characters knowledge of the events that unfolded. This is not to be confused with implementing a playable game world reflecting any of the epilogue slideshow events.
Story driven or not it, my suggestion including some others, has nothing to do with continuing the story from the epilogue. I am not suggesting they add more content for us to explore and unravel plot wise. The only story information that would be implemented is anything discerned via the main quest. This would be in the form of the main characters being placed in logical locations after recuperating from the events unfolding at the tower with Ciri entering it.

OK, I get it. It seems to me your suggestion is basically making up the gap between Ciri entering the tower and the final epilogue.

Now it is a very good suggestion and a better alternative than the vanilla game. The only thing is that I don't see it elevating the "endgame depression," at least not for me personally, because it still does not provide any kind of closure. I would gladly support your suggestion at a lower priority than expanded ending.
 
I myself have been gaming since I was 7-8 years old. I started on the original game boy and over the course of ~17 years of gaming, I seen and played just about everything. I recall being a child gamer, every video game was a treat. I had to work hard to convince my parents to purchase me a game but every game was well worth the effort (saving up allowance/chores/good grades etc). I recall during my early days of gaming, the feeling of being at awe, being taken by the technical achievement and mostly, being engulfed by the immersion - that I was in another world where anything is possible.

Being 25 now, I have a steady job that supports my passion for gaming. I game on the PC now and thanks to the technology of internet downloads, I have purchased and played just able every games that’s been out. Everyone once in a while, I find a gem (KSP, Prison architect, this war of mine etc), but games such as these are small budget titles. Although the passion and outside-the-box thinking are present, the scope just isn’t there to create that epic feeling, thus the lust is often short lived. Despite having access to so many games at my fingertips, I often browse through steam/Origin/GoG looking for something to fill the void – trying to find a game that allows me to be truly satisfied, to recreate the feeling from my childhood. On May 19, I started playing the Witcher 3…

All praises here are true. I feel the same way as many of my Witcher 3 comrades as I read through this tread and many others threa0s like it. I have great admiration for the Witcher 3 and even more respect for the development team behind this product. It would mean so much to every one of us if the team undertook the project being discussed in this thread. We understand this is a tough task, but it is not one without incentive. Gamers have paid more for far less. A paid, high quality DLC, in excess of the $19.99 would be very fair given the apparent quality of work from the studio. The Witcher 3 will be cited for years as an example of a perfect game. The act of developing a DLC expansion for post-game content won’t change that but it allows us gamers to find closure. For many of us, we are in a nostalgic euphoric state, and we would be very grateful for the developers at CDPR to bring us closure to an experience that many of us have long forgotten.
 
Whatever each of any of us wants, it needs resources. No need to bash on other people's ideas. At the end of the day, none would happen without CDPR's say so no matter how loud you speak for yours.
 
I was on post game depression for a few days, where I didn't touch the game. Tried playing it yesterday, collecting gwent cards,
killing a bunch of monsters that killed me with one hit early on, and had Geralt plough a Skellige swordmaiden and Nilfgaardian spy. I have to say, I still find it pretty enjoyable. If you don't think too much about the world state, the remaining content post main story is on par or better than anything Skyrim had to offer, seriously the high level monster contracts are quite interesting.

Can't support people calling the game broken just because Yen/Triss, Dandelion and Zoltan weren't there post main story to say 'Well?' or 'Geralt!' a million times. While I would have enjoyed seeing the fruits of my actions i.e. outcome of the war, Novigard, it doesn't change the fact that as is, minus the poor epilogue, it is already an amazing game. I'm fairly confident Red will address the issues lacking in the epilogue in the coming expansions.

As I've heard, while the two expansions are within the time frame of Wild Hunt, they never stated when, i.e. Before climax or after Ciri enters the tower and before the epilogue. So I'm keeping my hopes up that the expansions relate to Geralt finding Ciri after the tower, which hopefully end with a proper epilogue. I'm on the camp that Geralt's story has to end, and that the current ending is bollocks. My suggestion is that in the coming expansion, it takes place right before Geralt moves in with Yen/Triss, where they will ask him if he's ready to move and there will be two options where he says he has a few things to settle first or he says he's ready whereby the game ends, no post game, it just ends. This will satisfy both camps. Only time will tell, but I have faith.
 
The devs are right. It's a huge undertaking that would take months to make, i mean imagine: you would have to change the entire world to fit two endings, one where nilfgaard wins and the other one where redania wins. Not to mention edit everything that any character says to keep it in theme with the new world state. So X contract has a piece of dialogue that says "ooh, this war is going to be won by redania i'm sure of it" they would have to find it and re-voice it. I would much rather they spend their time creating new content for us to see, than spending time on a curiosity "which is what this is".

That being said, i still think the ending needs a re-work. It does not provide enough closure for the ending of the story from geralt, which we have been following for years. It just shows you succinct information on what's happened next and leaves you hanging. I mean i expected you meet your friends, and have a long dialogue sequence with every important character like Yen, Triss, Dandelion, Zoltan, Lambert, Eskel you know the main main characters. Something like the dragon age origins or inquisition epilogue, where you talk to everyone to see what happens and what they'll do next.

Also, would it really be so hard to modify kaer morhen to have yen, or create a new world map area called Triss's home in kovir, where you can only fast travel to your house where you can meet triss, have a romance option to kiss or have sex with her, and then be gone to finish the other stuff?
 
As I've heard, while the two expansions are within the time frame of Wild Hunt, they never stated when, i.e. Before climax or after Ciri enters the tower and before the epilogue.
This is their exact wording about the expansions "they’re within the story of the Witcher: Wild Hunt, running within the time frame, rather than after the ending"

After Ciri enters the tower = Wild Hunt is already 'tamed', unless they specificly mentioned before White Frost.

Wild Hunt refers to Eredin and his army, so gameplay wise, it could be done anytime before confronting Wild Hunt, but story wise the logical sense of time should be long before preparation, else it'd be weird being occupied by trivial things(10 and 20 hours estimated realtime gameplay respectively for both expansions) while there are more pressing matters ahead.

Imo the game itself doesn't have logical sense of time for the sake of gameplay which is understandable, I prefer it that way than having timed quest. NPC will wait as long as it takes for Geralt.

---------- Updated at 06:46 AM ----------

The devs are right. It's a huge undertaking that would take months to make, i mean imagine: you would have to change the entire world to fit two endings, one where nilfgaard wins and the other one where redania wins. Not to mention edit everything that any character says to keep it in theme with the new world state. So X contract has a piece of dialogue that says "ooh, this war is going to be won by redania i'm sure of it" they would have to find it and re-voice it. I would much rather they spend their time creating new content for us to see, than spending time on a curiosity "which is what this is".

That being said, i still think the ending needs a re-work. It does not provide enough closure for the ending of the story from geralt, which we have been following for years. It just shows you succinct information on what's happened next and leaves you hanging. I mean i expected you meet your friends, and have a long dialogue sequence with every important character like Yen, Triss, Dandelion, Zoltan, Lambert, Eskel you know the main main characters. Something like the dragon age origins or inquisition epilogue, where you talk to everyone to see what happens and what they'll do next.

Also, would it really be so hard to modify kaer morhen to have yen, or create a new world map area called Triss's home in kovir, where you can only fast travel to your house where you can meet triss, have a romance option to kiss or have sex with her, and then be gone to finish the other stuff?
We don't have enough resources or knowledge to assess what they're capable of, all we have is speculation which could never come close to the actual amount of time, money, and whatnot to make any changes happen. What we see as difficult might be piece of cake for them, and vice versa.

Some of the world states might happen even before the epilogue, right after the quest Reason of State, Radovid, Dijkstra, Roche/Ves could have died and they're important characters that will of course change a lot of things that might reflect immediately onto the world.

Regarding voices, can just use the generic voices, the ones that do not talk about the states of the world, but insulting Geralt or saying their own jokes, or just fart, there are quite a lot of variations, repetitive yes, but it serves its purpose.

New area can be made similar to Vizima, it only has one signpost, it has the feel of being somewhere but not part of the other regions. For house in Kovir or even Nilfgaard, no need to make a huge map for Kovir, can just make it like the way they did with Vizima.
 
New area can be made similar to Vizima, it only has one signpost, it has the feel of being somewhere but not part of the other regions. For house in Kovir or even Nilfgaard, no need to make a huge map for Kovir, can just make it like the way they did with Vizima.

This. People just want a satisfactory explanation since this is the last trilogy for Geralt. I too felt, like there's a lot of unanswered questions and narration in the epilogue itself further fueled the curiosity.
 
Actually every RPG I know "ends" with the main quest finale. The only exception to that rule are Bethesda games which are not really story-driven at all but exploration and "find your own story" driven.

Every story-driven (western) RPG I know ends with the main quest finale (Witcher 1 and 2, Baldurs Gate 1 and 2, Deus Ex 1-4, Icewind Dale 1 and 2, Wasteland 1 and 2, Planescape Torment, Gothic 1-3, Risen 1-3, ...). I guess all of them must have done something wrong... ;)

But I know the problem: there are always the Skyrim and MMO type of gamers who want every RPG to be turned into a Skyrim-like or MMO-like experience, no matter the actual focus of the game. Seems like CDPR listened too closely to that group.

"Mass Effect 2" and "Dragon Age: Inquisition", just off the top of my head (both western RPGs, both story driven, both with post-ending gameplay content).
Also don't like MMOs (to much grind and wasted time), so don't tar people with the same brush.

P.S. One more non RPG example just because post ending content was good, "Red Dead Redemption" (open world, story driven, with bang ending for the main character, still good post ending content even with some story bits).
 
Last edited:
This is their exact wording about the expansions "they’re within the story of the Witcher: Wild Hunt, running within the time frame, rather than after the ending"

After Ciri enters the tower = Wild Hunt is already 'tamed', unless they specificly mentioned before White Frost.

Wild Hunt refers to Eredin and his army, so gameplay wise, it could be done anytime before confronting Wild Hunt, but story wise the logical sense of time should be long before preparation, else it'd be weird being occupied by trivial things(10 and 20 hours estimated realtime gameplay respectively for both expansions) while there are more pressing matters ahead.

As far as I'm concerned, in the context of Wild Hunt the story, it doesn't end after the Wild Hunt has been 'tamed'. The dev's quote is open to interpretation as they say it happens "within the time frame rather than after the ending", where I see "ending" as the epilogue and slide shows. I'm expressing my hope that the expansions take place after the tower and before the epilogue. I think this would be the smartest way to answer a lot of plot holes and give Geralt a proper farewell. This makes much more sense economically than reediting the base game. Then again, RED could have already finished developing the expansions and it has nothing to do with what I hoped or what anyone here suggested. As I said before, only time will tell.
 
As far as I'm concerned, in the context of Wild Hunt the story, it doesn't end after the Wild Hunt has been 'tamed'. The dev's quote is open to interpretation as they say it happens "within the time frame rather than after the ending", where I see "ending" as the epilogue and slide shows. I'm expressing my hope that the expansions take place after the tower and before the epilogue. I think this would be the smartest way to answer a lot of plot holes and give Geralt a proper farewell. This makes much more sense economically than reediting the base game. Then again, RED could have already finished developing the expansions and it has nothing to do with what I hoped or what anyone here suggested. As I said before, only time will tell.

Changes is still possible because we are still months away from release. Else, why would CDPR staff occasionally comes into the forum to check on threads? :)
 
Changes is still possible because we are still months away from release. Else, why would CDPR staff occasionally comes into the forum to check on threads? :)

Exactly. I have a lot of faith in RED. First game dev not to charge you for additional nonessential DLC like new armor, skins *cough* Mortal Kombat X *cough*, and no preorder gimmicks like super crazy powerful sword or extra 30k gold *cough* GTA V *cough*.
 
Top Bottom