The Witcher 3 doesn't seem as magical as The Witcher 2?

+
The Witcher 3 doesn't seem as magical as The Witcher 2?

Hey guys

This is just my opinion and I wanted to post images but I couldn't find the right images from the Witcher 2 that would show the types of environments that made me go in awe. The art direction in the Witcher 2 was captivating. There were so many areas in the Witcher 2 that I really wanted to explore if only there was no invisible wall. I don't think this is nostalgia talking because the Witcher 2 is one of the most beautiful game I have ever played and certain areas just really stand out and really catch my attention like no other. Very few games have that sense of mystery like the Witcher 2.

Now I'm not saying that the Witcher 3 doesn't have beautiful area. It does in some screenshot but for the most, I just feel like this is a prettier Skyrim. I love snow but I don't like northern region. Grass do not grow like they do down south. There a reason people prefer warm sunny beaches than snowy cold weather. Also the color of the leaves, flowers, and grass are not as bright and vibrant in cold tundra like climates.

I also wish this game would expand on all Witcher 2 location such as the large open field where you had to sneak into the Nifgarrd (sorry about spelling) camp or the awe inspiring Flotsam. The moment where the Elves were shooting arrows and Triss had to protect those arrows with her power is a very special moment that I can never forget.

That is my feeling about the Witcher 3 at the moment. Tell me if you guys feel or same or not? I hope this thread make sense.
 
Not really seeing it. I'm actually replaying the Witcher 2 right now, and while it's a very good looking game, it falls far short of what I've seen of the Witcher 3. Art direction not withstanding, the Witcher 2 is a 32 bit DX9 game so it's much more limited as to the amount of detail that can be shown in any given scene. The Witcher 3 removes those restrictions by providing 64 bit and DX11, and so the artists can now run wild with abandon..

And who's to say that there won't be any locations that resemble Flotsam in the Witcher 3? Supposedly there will be plenty of villages in the game, and not to mention two large cities..
 
Not really seeing it. I'm actually replaying the Witcher 2 right now, and while it's a very good looking game, it falls far short of what I've seen of the Witcher 3. Art direction not withstanding, the Witcher 2 is a 32 bit DX9 game so it's much more limited as to the amount of detail that can be shown in any given scene. The Witcher 3 removes those restrictions by providing 64 bit and DX11, and so the artists can now run wild with abandon..

And who's to say that there won't be any locations that resemble Flotsam in the Witcher 3? Supposedly there will be plenty of villages in the game, and not to mention two large cities..

I think I remember reading that there won't be any Elves settlement or cities in the game?
 
Now I'm not saying that the Witcher 3 doesn't have beautiful area. It does in some screenshot but for the most, I just feel like this is a prettier Skyrim. I love snow but I don't like northern region. Grass do not grow like they do down south. There a reason people prefer warm sunny beaches than snowy cold weather. Also the color of the leaves, flowers, and grass are not as bright and vibrant in cold tundra like climates.

I wouldn't worry too much. The game won't be all snow and tundra. Those are only parts of one area. There'll be a number of different regions. (Also, The Witcher 2 took place just slightly northeast of the of the main lands of The Witcher III.) And, as for mystery, as we've not yet seen every different mountain, field, river, forest, swamp, dungeon, temple, cave, ruin, village, town, or city in full detail, it seems a wee bit soon to judge. I doubt we've seen aught yet. Take heart! I think it'll be fine indeed.
 
Last edited:
Miles Tost, in the Forum Q&A Spotlight , mentioned he pushed -- successfully -- for Elven ruins in the game.

eliharel asked:
It's said in the books that many main human cities were built on elven ones, such as Novigrad. Did you keep this in mind when designing them? If so, what did you do to give that vague elven foundation? Or did you work under the concept that it's been such a long time ago that there's barely any elven touch le
ft?

Always something that I remembered from the books and I always tried to bring up and pester people whenever there was a chance for it. Without going into further detail, all I can say so far is:
Mission successful.
 
Last edited:
Maybe the second expansion will be more to your liking then. In an interview they said a new region would be added to the game and it would look "extremely cheerful". I'm guessing that means the area is more colorful like you want.
 
I think I remember reading that there won't be any Elves settlement or cities in the game?

wat


anyway, i agree with thehotsung8701 , tw2 was very colorful and with lots of dwarves and elves, tw3 seems more... generic, it's still amazing, but in tw2 you can feel the magic in the air... i really hope tw3 will surpass all our expectations in a positive way
 
Personally, I'm not the biggest fan of The Witcher 2's radioactive looking environments (I remember them saying the game was made more colorful to appeal to american audiences; were nearly bankrupt at the time). I prefer the the toned down, yet still colorful look of the first and, hopefully, third game.
 
Tw2 felt more like western high fantasy world while tw3 is more in line with games like gothic and original witcher and that's great.
Originally flotsam supposed to look like that

They changed that in final game to appeal to mass audience.
 
Last edited:
Tw2 felt more like western high fantasy world while tw3 is more in line with games like gothic and original witcher and that's great.
Originally flotsam supposed to look like that

They changed that in final game to appeal to mass audience.



and that was castle from prologue




same thing happened in witcher 3 but not as big
 
Those two concept arts are amazing! The guy taking a piss at the first one is a cherry on top of that backwards, bleak, filthy cake stuffed with prejudice, stupidity and superstition that one could well expect of some backwards shithole shantytown in W universe [just as much as homey feeling of Valley of Flowers]. Though both pictures would look very differently on the warm, sunny, summer day. Well.. the first one would look more cheerful, but a smell in the air would definately gain... um... "personality" ;)

I actually like new art direction - i love it's variety and realism. Few days ago I walked exactly the same way that Danny was at the beginning of part 1/3 of gamespot's video - clear, deep blue skies, and that grim, grey palace shown in the video this time bathed in amber sunlight.... That's reality - sun doesn't care upon what horrors, injustice and tragedies it's shining on. It's rays chenge colours but don't change the world.
 

(Also, The Witcher 2 took place just slightly northeast of the of the main lands of The Witcher III.)

Not sure about that...

La Vallette is on the Pontar, upstream from what we have on the map... and it is I think somewhat to the South East of the NML region. (Between Oxenfurt and Vizima/White Orchard).
Flotsam is far upstream, more or less due East from the WH maps, with Vergen and Loc Muine further East again with little variation in latitude.

Skellige is to the WSW of Novigrad, but is apparently less favourably situated for a warm climate. Such things aren't unheard of ~ ocean currents can have profound effects on local climate (the UK is a good example of the opposite effect, where warm gulf stream waters give a climate significantly milder and less extreme than Canadian or Russian conditions at the same latitudes).
 
Last edited:
The Witcher was a varied mix of dark and gritty and bright and colourful ~ your memory must be playing tricks with you if you can only remember the grim.

Witcher 2 had dark, wet, drab environmental conditions and locations, as well as the bright cheerful backdrops to racism, murder, rape, pillage and rapine.

It is this ability to use variety to both emphasise the mood and to highlight that "dark" is more about actions, behaviours, mood than it is about weather and lighting that make the Witcher titles superior to their competition.

You end up just as dead if you fall on a sunny afternoon in a corn field surrounded by poppies as you do at midnight in a swamp.
 
The grittiness of the game has it's own thread so please either move there or stay on topic.
 
To be honest I agree with the sentiment of The Witcher 2 being really nice in art design and having a "magical" aura. On the other hand I always felt The Witcher 1 had more variety in environments and stuff. I mean sure, a lot of the game were very sinister and dark areas resembling the middle ages or areas like the united kingdom (vs. something more colorful like new zeeland). Such as Kear Morhen, Vizima and sourroundings, the marches. On the other hand we had a beautiful chapter IV with Murky Waters and the Lakeside which more resembled the beautiful environments of TW2.

I think a mix of both (which is the vibe I seem to get from TW3) might be the ideal solution. There are harsh (snowy) climated, dark rainy regions, but also sunny ones. Then there are the ones where weather changes. So far I have seen a variety of different color palettes in TW3 based on different weather conditions to the point where I was astonished how different one and the same game can look in different circumstances. So I would say "wait and see" how it turns out.
 
You have got to be joking, Ha! TW3 makes TW2 look like poop on my XB360!
Wait until you play it alone bud ;)
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom