- cities and villages should close thair gates for night. Player then would be constantly in danger from beasts.
I disagree. Well, partially.
I think yes the gates should be closed at night, but there should be 1 or 2 (more complicated) ways to get into the city at night non the less.
Quiet, intimate moments when you gather your friends around a campfire, exchanging stories from the past and rumours of today.
While Dandelion tunes his lute and starts singing...
Maybe not EXACTLY that, but you are right, I would really like to have more atmospheric dialogue filled time with my friends such as Zoltan, Dandelion. Triss, etc. and talking, telling stories, maybe also having things you might be able to do with them whenever you are in the mood, like playing cards with them, drinking with them, sitting around campfire or in a pub, etc. (And if we are talking friends: I'd like to see Iorveth again and Saskia (would love to have a chance to lift that curse since I chose Triss back then, because it was the obvious choice (Friends are always more important than allies, especially for a typical Witcher-like-neutral Geralt).
I like the idea with the Campfire system. Maybe they can even include a mechanic where - if you rest/meditate at a campfire you get + X Vitality as "well rested" bonus, a bonus that would of course be only existent until after the first fight.
Indeed.. or little details like being able to sit in chairs or on benches throughout the world would be really nice too.
Agreed, it makes it feel more atmospheric. And if it is only the ability to sit in chairs and on benches in Inns/Pubs.
It was discussed in some thread. I remember that many people wanted Geralt to talk about his recent endeavors with his friends, not just listening to the same phrases. Some kind of feed-back or possibility to boast.
Absolutely agreed. 2 things that can be shown here:
1. After they meet the first time again Geralt can tell about what he did in the last 6 months (since the player also doesn't know)
2. The friends could talk about and react to the things you as a player did already do in terms of side missions and main storyline and the decisions you made.
I think that random events or randomness, in general, is essential to a believable open world. The central idea here being that when you(the player) go into an area, you're not sure if something will be the same or if it will be different.
On the small scale, this can mean weather changes. So for example, one time you come to an area and it's bright and sunny, and next the next time you visit here, it's cloudy and raining. Or one time you visit an area and see a deer run across the screen, the next time you visit and there's nothing here.
And on the large scale, we can talk about big random events such as visiting a village and nothing eventful happens, and then coming back to the same village to stumble upon bandits raiding it. You can interfere, if you like, which will lead into a lengthy quest, with lots of characters, dialogue, etc.
Agreed 100%. But I think they even already talked about that in one of the interviews. I think I saw a Youtube video in which one of the devs was talking about the fact that sometimes you would come across a randomly created event where soldiers are molesting or harming civilians or something like that happens and Geralt can choose to interfer or to just leave them. That would be really cool if it would be expanded and done like you described it.
The weather is confirmed to be random - aside from one or two missions they said because in some quests a specific weather just makes it more "atmospheric" and immersive - so that's definitely going to be in the game.
or me personally, I think terrifying encounters with monster add a lot to the game.
Encounters that push not to mess with them when I amnot ready.
Imagine roaming some forest when a beast just comes and forces you to move unexpectedly.
It all comes down to unpredictability and richness in interactive and meaningful details.With NPCs and monsters alike.
My answer is really broad when I look at it and not very informative.It really is hard to come up with a good answer to that king of question.Making TW3 must have been really challenging every step of the way.
Indeed, I would welcome this.
Imagine either tracking a monster or coming around a corner and suddenly a monster attacks you, or even a monster preying you for a few minutes and striking, and the monster is so challenging/hard/terrifying that you first have to escape it. Then you have to look in the bestiary and analyze what kind of monster it is and look what weaknesses it has, and then you take potions, apply oils and equip weapons and get ready to follow it's trail and attack it. And this time it's you with the advantage, it's you who will surprise it and have the upper hand because you know what you are dealing with.
THAT is something I like to experience in TW3.
How many romance options do we have in this huge world, apart from the main story line ? Tie in some side quests to romance options (with both Humans & Non-Humans). Sighting the disapproval from many sources on Sex in The Witcher 1, I think the number of romance options were reduced in The Witcher 2. The Witcher 1 had a lot of romance options , I hope It will more than that, this time in the Witcher 3.
They clearly said that Gerals will be less adventerous sexually in TW3 because of his bond with Triss/Yennefer and because he has a big part of his memory back, etc.
But I agree. I would at least like to have a small variety of romance options, a little bit more than in TW2 (because we had only about 4 (Triss, Ves, Mottle and the Succubus, + Cynthia in the Enhanced Edition), but PLEASE less than in TW1 (it was too full of random sexual encounters). So I'd like to have 1 or 2 more than in TW2 but please keep the quality and EXCELLENT way of portraying the scenes (I think I have never ever seen better romance scenes than the one in The Witcher 2, they were tasteful and very atmospheric and they were beautiful from an artistic POV).
I don't need the Brothels btw. I think Geralt is now emotionally mature enough to not go to a Brothel if he wants to have Sex, so I don't need that.
While populating tw3 world, cdpr needs to keep right amount of quest density. If we got hub area like little village never EVER make it for only one quest. Let the player spend time in places and get used to them, that's how you make it more memorable.
Same goes for POIs. Making huge castle to hunt one monster or to kill x monsters is not good idea, make those places live with stuff happening, but don't go overboard. Even few npcs with small mundane problems can make location much more interesting. Few travelers lost in the ruins make the ruins livelier. Same with hunters camp on the swamp. Interactions between places are also critical. Overall desolate places are ok but even better if they are "desolate with a twist".
Agreed, and the roads/spaces between those places can be used for random monster encounters (which hopefully respawn from time to time) and random people/event encounters.
Also, I don't want TW2-style environments where everything is so limited. That you can sail, ride, jump and even climb mountains (they said that in an interview) really gives me hope. I really hope it is the way that (imagine) If I am in a forest and I see a mountain ahead of me and on that mountain above there is a cave, that I do not have to walk around and search for a path but that I can climb the rocks and get to the cave that way. I want that freedom.
Why are sex options always called romance. There is no romance, There is just pure sex. Even ME doesn't have proper romance. That this passes as romance now is kind of disturbing... Why not name it as it is. There is nothing wrong with just having some fun...
Romance is defined by the way the scene is shown IMO. For example I would call Triss and Ves a romance Scene, Cynthia and Mottle rather Sex Scene and the Succubus definitely a Sex Scene (though a very exotic one that has kind of a romantic and exciting part to it)
It depends IMO on how the scenes are portrayed and how they can be romanticized in contrast to how they can be sexualiszed. It also has a lot to do with facial expressions, body language and background music IMO. I think scenes in older games can be more called sex scenes because the means to show and underline the romantic aspect of them was not that available. Nowadays with the new technique to show emotions on faces and in body language I think that this defines such scenes new and one can definitely see the difference between a Sex scene and a scene that CAN be interpreted romantically. That all does of course depend on you own emotional maturity.
I want to just watch and listen to the nature of all the wild life this game has to offer. Some times that is more then enough, because I dont always want npc's or even monsters barking up my ass every step I take. I more often then not just want to be left the fuck alone. I want some space and time to think for myself and explore the art of this world as a walking meditation.
I agree. In my opinion this should be based on the time. At day you might be walking without being attacked by monsters (or even without being followed) if you do not come too close to their actual areas/lairs/territories, but at Night I think the danger of monsters spreading more, the danger of a monster attack being more persistent should be there.
That can (IMO) be countered by creating a campfire. If you give Geralt the ability to make a Campfire and sit down it might keep the monsters away from the light. By creating such a mechanic you create a "save spot" for the player in the night and an atmospheric place to set up everywhere you want while simultaneously allowing the rest of the areas - provided there is no campfire - to be very dangerous to you at night.
If you want to masturbate that much you should try porn, CDProjekt RED have already stated that sex scenes will serve as character development and won't be there just because you like boobs.
Seriously I don't believe there is a guy in the world who can masturbate that fast. Those scenes are in motion constantly, switch between Geralt and his Partner often enough and are pretty short. So alone that can be more compared with a movie love scene than any kind of porn or masturbation fantasy.
That is a romance scene for me, it creates an atmospheric feeling and virtual bond to the character your protagonist is with to underline their commitment and passion for each other.
Sure, in terms of characters like Cynthia in TW2 it's more a "hey let's have fun". But even there is a short romantic part in it rather than a solely sexual and plastic experience IMO.
Well as I see it in ME, you flirt around with the women, pretend interest, then you have sex with one of them and then you stop caring, cause that plotline is done. TW2 had romance with Triss sometimes, but the rest was just pure sexual interest.
I was just critizising calling it more than it is most of the time. I am still under the impression, that romance options is mostly used as a euphemism for sex options. I don't mind, if there is just purposeful interaction, but if there is random sex, it should as well be called that.
I think in TW1 it was pure sex, in TW2 though Geralt had a connection to all the characters he had the option to sleep with - except maybe the Succubus and that I think is an exception and can 100% be called an adventurous sex scene (and Mottle maybe since he just saved her).
Buuuut.... Back to topic...
I would like fellow adventurers as Dandelion, Zoltan, Iorveth or others could accompany Geralt actively in at least some adventures.
It would be fun to see Geralt fighting accompanied by Zoltan-Iorveth-Milva, quarrels between Triss and Jennifer, who fled during the fighting Dandelion ... would not you?
You know what I found cool in the Witcher 2 in that regard? 2 things:
1. The mission with Zoltan (Iorveths Path) where you and Zoltan (and the others (okay they were annoying, but not Zoltan)) went into the mines killing all those Rotfiends
2. The scene with you and Iorveth standing back to back with sword drawn.
I like those scenes where Geralt (for a change) does fight with one of his companions at his side (Geralt and Zoltan, Geralt and Iorveth, Geralt and Saskia,also Geralt and Triss fighting together), it is kind of badass in it's own way. It shouldn't happen to often but maybe we could have that once in a while in some side missions or even 1 or 2 main missions.
I surely hope we will meet the guys again, ESPECIALLY Zoltan, Dandelion and Triss. And if possible also Saskia, like I said I never removed the curse, maybe TW3 is an opportunity to set this straight. I mean come on, there needs to be some backlash because Phillipa escaped and I didn't heal Saskia.
I was thinking that there should be at least one mission where geralt is invited to a dinner or a dance by the yarl or who ever where, its starts out as just a normal event but is changed into something related to a story, for example this could be near the start of the game where geralt could meet up with triss,dendalion and geralt's other friends, this would be a nice way to reintroduce the characters and could be something different to keep missions fresh and exciting.
Also if everyone wore formal clothes it would be nice to see them in something other than their normal attire
Agreed.
Triss it's probably following you, like in the second game where she was in the tent with you
In an interview the developers said that Triss and Geralt wouldn't have seen each other for quite some time at the beginning of The Witcher 3 and then would somehow meet.
