Well, good for you then. Doesn't change the fact that significantly more people are against auto-refilling. Might even be more people than me who made that mistake, because honestly, who would answer "yes" and also say they prefer TW1?
That is the point Dragonbird is making. Its a multivote poll meaning people voting "No" are also likely voting on which item they prefer, which is how there are so many more votes than actual voters. Thats why we can only guess that some where between 36-58% of the people are strongly against the autorefill. Even at 58%, which is unlikely, its a majority but not an overwhelming one.
All in all its a poorly constructed poll. It isn't well defined and there are too many options.
Sorry @Kudos I seem to have misunderstood your first statement, you just seemed so vehemently supportive of auto-refilling in your other comments.
When you said "ultimately all we need to look at is yes & maybe" I took that as you saying "no" votes didn't matter. Which is something someone else did a while ago, when they started a new poll that didn't include any options for being opposed to the idea. Again, sorry about that misunderstanding, and could any moderator add my vote the "no" option then? I didn't realize we had multiple votes and I cannot change it.
When you said "ultimately all we need to look at is yes & maybe" I took that as you saying "no" votes didn't matter. Which is something someone else did a while ago, when they started a new poll that didn't include any options for being opposed to the idea. Again, sorry about that misunderstanding, and could any moderator add my vote the "no" option then? I didn't realize we had multiple votes and I cannot change it.
No problem mate, glad we've cleared that up. I'm certainly no fan of this autofill idea, sounds fairly pathetic to me and stinks of "streamlining". I emphasise the yes & maybe because they are the only votes we can really trust and are fortunately enough to produce a reasonable result (from a badly designed poll as Madness points out).
The poll allows each person to vote once, but they can check more than one box when they vote.
502 people have voted. There were 671 votes cast, which is OK because it's a multiple choice, it's still 502 distinct people.
It's unlikely that many people will have voted for some combination of "Yes", "No" and "Maybe", so these should be close to exclusive. That accounts for 389 of the 502. The other 113 people ignored the first three points and voted for one (or both) of the TW1/TW2 questions.
So the total vote count is:
Yes: 56
No: 180
Wait and see: 153
Didn't choose an option: 113
That means that the total who think "No" is between between 180 and 313 (180+113) out of 502. Between 36% and 62%.
Not really an overwhelming majority.
502 people have voted. There were 671 votes cast, which is OK because it's a multiple choice, it's still 502 distinct people.
It's unlikely that many people will have voted for some combination of "Yes", "No" and "Maybe", so these should be close to exclusive. That accounts for 389 of the 502. The other 113 people ignored the first three points and voted for one (or both) of the TW1/TW2 questions.
So the total vote count is:
Yes: 56
No: 180
Wait and see: 153
Didn't choose an option: 113
That means that the total who think "No" is between between 180 and 313 (180+113) out of 502. Between 36% and 62%.
Not really an overwhelming majority.
Last edited:
I have a question.
I try to solve the whole debate or at least make it CLEARER, by starting a new more clear poll and carrying together most arguments and it gets closed within less than 1 day by a mod. I mean, seriously?! We need that thread. Yes, this thread here was first, but the poll does not deliver any good, solid or clear results.
I wanted to make the effort, went ahead and spend 30 - 60 minutes of my valuable time to do something for the community, something a lot of people here mentioned might be very useful since the poll is not clear enough, and it gets closed.
Come on mods, that is just mean. I understand threads about similar topics should be closed in 90% of the cases but this is an exception.
I try to solve the whole debate or at least make it CLEARER, by starting a new more clear poll and carrying together most arguments and it gets closed within less than 1 day by a mod. I mean, seriously?! We need that thread. Yes, this thread here was first, but the poll does not deliver any good, solid or clear results.
I wanted to make the effort, went ahead and spend 30 - 60 minutes of my valuable time to do something for the community, something a lot of people here mentioned might be very useful since the poll is not clear enough, and it gets closed.
Come on mods, that is just mean. I understand threads about similar topics should be closed in 90% of the cases but this is an exception.
Yes, we might need a new thread and at the time I thought you had worked out the poll quite nicely, albeit not perfectly. I also happen to believe it's best to wait after Gamescom. No doubt Kinley will evoke real answers from the REDs and who knows, maybe some things haven't been properly explained or at all, or maybe they simply have reversed their stance. One can hope.
Let's wait till after Gamescom. By then, everyone will be in a better position to judge and vote consciously and I will gladly join my voice to those calling for a new thread.
Last edited:
There is no point to it, internet polls are not useful for anything but generating awareness. Considering the devs have said that they are always lurking here, I'm sure they haven't overlooked the 24 page thread that has been floating near the top of the forum for months.
I'm going to hazard a guess and say brushwood is used to make campfires for meditation.
Based on the "3/3 Swallow" indicator on the bottom left, I'm going to hazard another guess and say that the system hasn't changed, the player receives a maximum of 3 Swallows each time the player uses up a brushwood to meditate.
After looking up what 'brushwood' actually is and the fact, that Geralt lights up the campfire in pretty much the same spot he gathered the brushwood from you might be right in your assumption.
However, the 'Downwarren' footage was most likely captured from the same build that was used for showcasing the game at E3 back in June, so the alchemy system actually might have undergone changes (hopefully for the better) in the meantime.
Guess we'll know more on that and other alchemy-related issues tomorrow (or was it Friday @Kinley is relaying the community questions to CDPR at gamescom?).
However, the 'Downwarren' footage was most likely captured from the same build that was used for showcasing the game at E3 back in June, so the alchemy system actually might have undergone changes (hopefully for the better) in the meantime.
Guess we'll know more on that and other alchemy-related issues tomorrow (or was it Friday @Kinley is relaying the community questions to CDPR at gamescom?).
The witcher 1 system for me was best, TW2 system was ok but felt more like a downgrade compared to the first game without the need of a alcohol base. I also hated the fact that you had to meditate in order to drink a potion. In the witcher 1 you could just pop a cork and jugg a potion during combat which felt more realistic.
I don't like TW3's potion system at all with this drink first - activate when you want later - method of doing it. ALso the potions auto-refill or something like that which is also unrealistically lame.
The witcher 1's system was perfect in my opinion and it didn't slow combat down. The witcher 2's combat system was okay but it was bad imho because you had to drink first before a fight which involved scouting ahead, then reloading a save and drinking the potion when you were actually allowed to after you discovered what was ahead. Maybe that's why they made the witcher 3's potion system where you can activate an affect at any time after drinking a potion.
But honestly, what's the point when TW1 has an overall superior system in regards to both problems.
If it really comes down to it, hopefully we can just modify the game to allow the potion system that we all prefer to play with. For me personally, TW1 system was the best.
I don't like TW3's potion system at all with this drink first - activate when you want later - method of doing it. ALso the potions auto-refill or something like that which is also unrealistically lame.
The witcher 1's system was perfect in my opinion and it didn't slow combat down. The witcher 2's combat system was okay but it was bad imho because you had to drink first before a fight which involved scouting ahead, then reloading a save and drinking the potion when you were actually allowed to after you discovered what was ahead. Maybe that's why they made the witcher 3's potion system where you can activate an affect at any time after drinking a potion.
But honestly, what's the point when TW1 has an overall superior system in regards to both problems.
If it really comes down to it, hopefully we can just modify the game to allow the potion system that we all prefer to play with. For me personally, TW1 system was the best.
Last edited:
So I was at Gamescom yesterday. And I was lucky enough to be able to talk to one of the developers (which name I do not mention out of respect, don't know if he would want that) being at the presentation. I asked him about the alchemy system and he told me they are aware of the big debate going on here on the fourms. He also said they are still working on it and it is not finished yet, but there will be an update about this "soon" as far as he knows. He gestured actual quotes with his hands when he said the word soon to underline the fact that he does not know if it will be weeks or months or whatever, but they are aware of it and still working on it and if there is something new they will tell us.
(Btw. something off topic here, but I was able to spot actual wildlife (a pack of wolves) in the demo, and this time around (they showed the Griffin demo) the Griffin was really hard to kill at first. But more on that in another thread)
(Btw. something off topic here, but I was able to spot actual wildlife (a pack of wolves) in the demo, and this time around (they showed the Griffin demo) the Griffin was really hard to kill at first. But more on that in another thread)
Last edited:
So it is kind of like the 'tea bag' solution without the diminishing returns for each of the (three) sips / every subsequently brewed potion. Once the concoction is used up you have to gather (less) ingredients and actively brew it again. I could live with that, although it would have been even better with the decreasing efficiency part factored in as well. But then again this isn't necessarily the final iteration of the alchemy system the game ships with, particularly with regard to @BlackWolf500s account.
I wonder if this approach was implemented the whole time and just wasn't communicated all that well due to bad choice of words or if CDPR actually overhauled the system taking and incorporating ideas of their own or from the thread.
I guess for bombs you would get multiple bombs out of a single crafting procedure to mirror the multiple potion charges per brewing procedure? @Kinley, maybe?
Last edited:
No, I think they threw ideas around and changed it a few times.
This one sounds pretty much okay.
I think it's cool and also encourages using potions to make the amount of material needed less after you brewed it the first time, it's like a hybrid of a unlock system and the typical material gathering and stuff, and it's pretty cool IMO.
With the 2 potions types, the during-combat option, the upgrade system and the new tea-bag system I am 100% okay with how all of that works. So if this is the final version I have no complains.
It's surely possible that the developer I talked to knew about this but didn't know if the team wanted to communicate this yet, so he said there is an update "soon".
I am also sure that one of the devs will come here and tell us about it in a few days.
Last edited:
Yeah, this new information sounds good to me as well. It's a really good feeling to see the results of developers taking feedback from the fans to heart like this =)
Yeah, that bit confused me as well, I'm not sure how it works anymore.