There will be more expansions?

[Deathmagnetic]

I distinctly remember Marcin Iwinsky saying, that they will support the game for 2 years.



It's better if it's the setting for Witcher 4. An expansion cant do a whole kingdom justice.

Support for 2 years? I never knew this. Great news if true.

Would love a witcher 4 ( would be a hell of a wait though. ) or new open world rpg from these guys. Similar to elder scrolls or gothic etc. Choosing a race, gender,or classes like: A ranger,paladin,thief ,mage etc. I think CDPR would do an awesome job at something like this. Would probably do it better than bethesda.

I remember you from the bethesda forums.

 

[PillarBiter]

To me, the witcher's story may be over and done with. Let it end on a high note. Expansions may alwya sfollow though

I didn't know about cyberpunk! cool, i'll keep my eye on that!

 

[Gibasny]

I can predict future - till 2016 Witcher is the main theme in CDPR, after that Cyberpunk for about 2-3 years (depend how players will like it) and after that so in about 2020-2022 we will get Witcher 4 - with no Geralt but custom character, with all the zones you are talking about - Kovir, Dol Blathana etc. etc.

 

[Sam2305]

I lost faith in CDPR and probably won't buy any of their game until it goes on sale. Witcher 2 is still far more epic and funner than Witcher 3. CDPR lost their vision of what made Witcher 2 so special.

I can't agree more. The Witcher 3 it's a simplified game oriented to atract new players and make money. The story was sacrified in order to build a massive and impresive open world. That's why I'm asking for the expansions. I hope they will fix something (maybe an Enhanced Edition)

 

[guilherme22]

I lost faith in CDPR and probably won't buy any of their game until it goes on sale. Witcher 2 is still far more epic and funner than Witcher 3. CDPR lost their vision of what made Witcher 2 so special.

reviews from both professionals and amateurs says otherwise


it's your opinion, though.


i'm betting in tw3 for GOTY

---------- Updated at 02:37 PM ----------

I distinctly remember Marcin Iwinsky saying, that they will support the game for 2 years.



It's better if it's the setting for Witcher 4. An expansion cant do a whole kingdom justice.

if i were CD i would make witcher 4 for customization instead a linear history from a determined character.

 

[WolvenGear]

I sure hope they make 2 more than the ones we allready know about. I paid for the expansion pass allready cause I know CDPR will deliver!

 

[Sam2305]

reviews from both professionals and amateurs says otherwise


it's your opinion, though.


i'm betting in tw3 for GOTY

---------- Updated at 02:37 PM ----------



if i were CD i would make witcher 4 for customization instead a linear history from a determined character.

I'm wondering how many of those ""profesionals" have played to the previous games. And one question, have you?

 

[guilherme22]

I'm wondering how many of those ""profesionals" have played to the previous games. And one question, have you?

of course i did

are you saying, by any instance, that the gameplay from the first witcher is better? or the linearity of the second is funnier than an open world?


LOL

 

[Octavius3]

Support for 2 years? I never knew this. Great news if true.

Would love a witcher 4 ( would be a hell of a wait though. ) or new open world rpg from these guys. Similar to elder scrolls or gothic etc. Choosing a race, gender,or classes like: A ranger,paladin,thief ,mage etc. I think CDPR would do an awesome job at something like this. Would probably do it better than bethesda.

I remember you from the bethesda forums.

It's true, it was stated in one of the closed thread (maybe the 1st talking about "lack of" Triss). But it does not mean there will be a 3rd DLC, they can always supply the playerbase with little contents (free mini dlcs) until 2016 ends. But onestly I greatly hope for a 3rd DLC not around new characters, but around the old ones who have little love in the main game.

 

[Sam2305]

of course i did

are you saying, by any instance, that the gameplay from the first witcher is better? or the linearity of the second is funnier than an open world?


LOL

Both games have a better story than the Witcher 3. Much more deeper and insteresting. I rather prefer The Witcher 2 instead of the Witcher 3. Maybe it's a lineal game but the characters, locations and story are much better. I don't understand why so many people prefer impressive graphics or open worlds when the main quest of their games are full of holes and inconsistencies.


Anyway, this is off topic. If you want to answer, do it. I won't reply

 

[Christopherrolf]

shoddy combat system where rolling and quick attacking after a magic shot is your only option because parrying and strong attack makes no sense. As it sits this game is watered down kiddy stuff roll and quick attack...magic shot, roll and quick attack....

This is how the game looks for the majority of us who've actually tried to learn the basics of the combat system. Just one example of numerous videos out there refuting every single of your claims.

 

[bradb2015]

This is how the game looks for the majority of us who've actually tried to learn the basics of the combat system. Just one example of numerous videos out there refuting every single of your claims.

LOL...ALL that video does is show even more proof of how far off of balance this game really is...so if you want decent combat you have to SACRIFICE magic...i see you have almost 0 magic skills...so ya...a bunch of repetitive combat with no balance to magic...more PROOF of how unbalanced everything is...so nice..more proof on my points there guy..good job.

 

[Christopherrolf]

Not at all. I chose that video because it showcases the points you were bringing up. Sign builds, alchemy builds and hybrid builds are completely viable, go do a search and see for yourself.

 

[Tooters]

I lost faith in CDPR and probably won't buy any of their game until it goes on sale. Witcher 2 is still far more epic and funner than Witcher 3. CDPR lost their vision of what made Witcher 2 so special.

Personally I prefer 1 to 2 - Plenty of Witchering to do, not too political plot, more in tune with the books ~ Although Geralt's sudden urge to sleep with the whole female cast lost me a little.

I think the Witcher 3 brought back that feeling from the first game, Geralt - As with all Witchers - are politically neutral and while Geralt clearly only stayed by Foltest's side because he wanted to remain with Triss, the rest of he Witcher 2 he is getting very deep into politics, and in the case of a certain country makes a very important impact, which while a very good game is a bit odd - Geralt is held to the games plot by force, if he doesn't meddle with all these conflicts he cannot clear his, and Triss' name - He is a prisoner to the plot essentially.

However I can see where you are coming from a sense, the loss of this heavily political plot for a destiny one is a very big jump, the Witcher 1 & 2 were a little more grounded, but as this is an event that was a long, long time coming its not really a surprise.

I still think that 3 takes the best of both games - Pretty good combat, Nice world and worldbuilding, believably crafted story and characters (some inconsistencies but its still waaay above the standard) and a lovely amount of polish.

~~~

As for further expansions I would love to see more, plenty of world left to explore, I want to see some of the other countries and some end-game expansions set in the world that you crafted during your playthrough with all the results of your choices to see.

 

[Chri2Kng]

Both games have a better story than the Witcher 3. Much more deeper and insteresting. I rather prefer The Witcher 2 instead of the Witcher 3. Maybe it's a lineal game but the characters, locations and story are much better. I don't understand why so many people prefer impressive graphics or open worlds when the main quest of their games are full of holes and inconsistencies.


Anyway, this is off topic. If you want to answer, do it. I won't reply

Witcher 2 graphics is still amazing. It is the Crysis of the RPG world. No matter what year it is it will always stand the test of time. Actually if you compare some of the brick walls to those of Witcher 3, Witcher 2 is actually more high def and better texture in some area.

I didn't care for open world for Witcher 2, I only care about the game length. Witcher 2 at only 25 hours is too short for me. There is also something really impressive with lock location boss battles. Remember the Kayran in Witcher 2? That more epic than any boss battle in the Witcher 3 and that reason is because if you fighting a boss and your not lock to one location, it become too easy and less epic.

The thing that really disappointed me about Witcher 3 is there isn't any cinematic cutscene. Most cutscene are just boring dialogue. They look out cinematic cutscenes probably because the story wasn't good enough. The most you got were a few Wild Hunts cinematic cut scenes.

---------- Updated at 09:22 PM ----------

Personally I prefer 1 to 2 - Plenty of Witchering to do, not too political plot, more in tune with the books ~ Although Geralt's sudden urge to sleep with the whole female cast lost me a little.

I think the Witcher 3 brought back that feeling from the first game, Geralt - As with all Witchers - are politically neutral and while Geralt clearly only stayed by Foltest's side because he wanted to remain with Triss, the rest of he Witcher 2 he is getting very deep into politics, and in the case of a certain country makes a very important impact, which while a very good game is a bit odd - Geralt is held to the games plot by force, if he doesn't meddle with all these conflicts he cannot clear his, and Triss' name - He is a prisoner to the plot essentially.

However I can see where you are coming from a sense, the loss of this heavily political plot for a destiny one is a very big jump, the Witcher 1 & 2 were a little more grounded, but as this is an event that was a long, long time coming its not really a surprise.

I still think that 3 takes the best of both games - Pretty good combat, Nice world and worldbuilding, believably crafted story and characters (some inconsistencies but its still waaay above the standard) and a lovely amount of polish.

When I saw the graphics, I knew that the Witcher 3 would be more like the Witcher 1 but without the impressive story. When I found out that it had no connection with the Witcher 2 and was base off the book this time around, I knew then that It wouldn't have been great. I don't want realistic armors and clothing, I want a fantasy driven game and unfortuantely Witcher 3 isn't Witcher 2 for reason I quite don't understand. Even Dark Souls 2 still had Dark Souls 1 vibe to it. I was hoping that would be the case with the Witcher 3 as well.

Also I don't know about you but I prefer Witcher 2 Geralt and his voice over Witcher 3 Geralt and his voice. I actually really dislike Geralt now and that wasn't the case with the first two games. It hard to enjoy the game when you hate the character your controlling.

 

[Sam2305]

Personally I prefer 1 to 2 - Plenty of Witchering to do, not too political plot, more in tune with the books ~ Although Geralt's sudden urge to sleep with the whole female cast lost me a little.

I think the Witcher 3 brought back that feeling from the first game, Geralt - As with all Witchers - are politically neutral and while Geralt clearly only stayed by Foltest's side because he wanted to remain with Triss, the rest of he Witcher 2 he is getting very deep into politics, and in the case of a certain country makes a very important impact, which while a very good game is a bit odd - Geralt is held to the games plot by force, if he doesn't meddle with all these conflicts he cannot clear his, and Triss' name - He is a prisoner to the plot essentially.

However I can see where you are coming from a sense, the loss of this heavily political plot for a destiny one is a very big jump, the Witcher 1 & 2 were a little more grounded, but as this is an event that was a long, long time coming its not really a surprise.

I still think that 3 takes the best of both games - Pretty good combat, Nice world and worldbuilding, believably crafted story and characters (some inconsistencies but its still waaay above the standard) and a lovely amount of polish.

~~~

As for further expansions I would love to see more, plenty of world left to explore, I want to see some of the other countries and some end-game expansions set in the world that you crafted during your playthrough with all the results of your choices to see.

I respect your opinion but I can't agree, I've read the books and I understand why you prefer that Geralt stays neutral but you have to think on the Witcher 3 as the end of a trilogy. If you put a lot of political decisions in the second part, the consequences of these decisions must be seen in the third part. It's logical. Anyway, Geralt has a lot of political power in this game. He can decide the fate of the war!

---------- Updated at 09:42 PM ----------

Witcher 2 graphics is still amazing. It is the Crysis of the RPG world. No matter what year it is it will always stand the test of time. Actually if you compare some of the brick walls to those of Witcher 3, Witcher 2 is actually more high def and better texture in some area.

I didn't care for open world for Witcher 2, I only care about the game length. Witcher 2 at only 25 hours is too short for me. There is also something really impressive with lock location boss battles. Remember the Kayran in Witcher 2? That more epic than any boss battle in the Witcher 3 and that reason is because if you fighting a boss and your not lock to one location, it become too easy and less epic.

The thing that really disappointed me about Witcher 3 is there isn't any cinematic cutscene. Most cutscene are just boring dialogue. They look out cinematic cutscenes probably because the story wasn't good enough. The most you got were a few Wild Hunts cinematic cut scenes.

---------- Updated at 09:22 PM ----------



When I saw the graphics, I knew that the Witcher 3 would be more like the Witcher 1 but without the impressive story. When I found out that it had no connection with the Witcher 2 and was base off the book this time around, I knew then that It wouldn't have been great. I don't want realistic armors and clothing, I want a fantasy driven game and unfortuantely Witcher 3 isn't Witcher 2 for reason I quite don't understand. Even Dark Souls 2 still had Dark Souls 1 vibe to it. I was hoping that would be the case with the Witcher 3 as well.

Also I don't know about you but I prefer Witcher 2 Geralt and his voice over Witcher 3 Geralt and his voice. I actually really dislike Geralt now and that wasn't the case with the first two games. It hard to enjoy the game when you hate the character your controlling.

Completely agree. Good point on the kayran.

Anyway, this is off topic. We should focus on the original theme

 

[Pug.]

I sincerely hope so. I'd really like to see Kovir, or the other Northern parts of the map. Dol Blathanna would be another one I wouldn't mind seeing.

Anything that could extend on the characters more would be great to me though.

I'd be all over a Kovir expansion - that would be awesome. Geralt even knows a dude up north - the mage from the "Tower Outta Nowheres" quest.

 

[Sharpy47]

Please stay on topic guys..

 

[Chri2Kng]

I respect your opinion but I can't agree, I've read the books and I understand why you prefer that Geralt stays neutral but you have to think on the Witcher 3 as the end of a trilogy. If you put a lot of political decisions in the second part, the consequences of these decisions must be seen in the third part. It's logical. Anyway, Geralt has a lot of political power in this game. He can decide the fate of the war!

---------- Updated at 09:42 PM ----------



Completely agree. Good point on the kayran.

Anyway, this is off topic. We should focus on the original theme

In that case, i want unique location and it a shame that the first expansion won't have a unique location. I want Nifgarrd, Zerkannia, Kovir, and Baldonna (I am bad with spelling fantasy location name). I also want the old location but expand like Flotsam, Lock Muinne, etc... I also want new location not in the book because I hate when games are made to be accurate with a book. I wish Witcher was a new IP not base off any book so the developer can make it however they want.

 

[jubeii]

Personally I prefer 1 to 2 - Plenty of Witchering to do, not too political plot, more in tune with the books ~ Although Geralt's sudden urge to sleep with the whole female cast lost me a little.

I think the Witcher 3 brought back that feeling from the first game, Geralt - As with all Witchers - are politically neutral and while Geralt clearly only stayed by Foltest's side because he wanted to remain with Triss, the rest of he Witcher 2 he is getting very deep into politics, and in the case of a certain country makes a very important impact, which while a very good game is a bit odd - Geralt is held to the games plot by force, if he doesn't meddle with all these conflicts he cannot clear his, and Triss' name - He is a prisoner to the plot essentially.

However I can see where you are coming from a sense, the loss of this heavily political plot for a destiny one is a very big jump, the Witcher 1 & 2 were a little more grounded, but as this is an event that was a long, long time coming its not really a surprise.

I still think that 3 takes the best of both games - Pretty good combat, Nice world and worldbuilding, believably crafted story and characters (some inconsistencies but its still waaay above the standard) and a lovely amount of polish.

~~~

As for further expansions I would love to see more, plenty of world left to explore, I want to see some of the other countries and some end-game expansions set in the world that you crafted during your playthrough with all the results of your choices to see.

I agree with you. Having played the first game then read the books, the whole prologue to W2 just didnt fit for me. There is just no realistic reason geralt would fight in a war. I know he did in the books but only to acheive his goal of crossing a river. The story after the prologue was fantastic, but coloured by the fact that I had to kill countless soldiers with out a good enough reason.
I love that Geralt has come back into character for W3, although like many others, I'm disapointed with the lack of carry over choices from the previos games.
Also disappointed with the lack of adult content for this adult game in comparison with 1&2.
Perhaps this content can be restored for the expansions.
I'm pretty sure that Iorveth will show up at some point. Just to good a character to be absent.