Multiplatform Official Next-gen WITCHER 3 Discussion

[GearSolidMetal]

I remember reading they'd do something to do with the witcher but it wouldn't involve geralt and the rest of the characters we know. Which would be pretty shit tbh. Hopefully with the recent interest they change their minds.

They will change their minds.

Thronebreaker, a Witcher sidestory game, didn't do as well as CDPR had hoped.

I bet they'll make Witcher 4 but with Ciri as the main playable character.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

I couldn't care less. I don't really see the point in picking it up(faster load times ain't worth $50-$60), but you can't blame them. Remasters are popular.

Its an free update, not a remaster.

If you already own the game, congrats, its yours.

 

[HereticBD]

Its an free update, not a remaster.

If you already own the game, congrats, its yours.

I don't want it.

*spits on the ground*

 

[GearSolidMetal]

I don't want it.

*spits on the ground*

Ok bro.

You do you.

 

[Hitman81]

Eh. It's a fantastic game, one of my favorite of this gen. But I've played it a lot and it's starting to show its age. I'm buying a PS5 to play PS5 games.

 

[My Spot]

I'm surprised Capcom hasn't announced ports of RE4 yet.

 

[Losfer Words]

Ive put an absurd amount of time in the witcher 3.

 

[mixmastermo]

Sorry to say, but the 'high scored gameplay' isn't there. Its good, not great, and since 2015 and for the years to come it won't age well.

That said, the world, exploration, characters, story, quests, upgrading, and expansions are unmatched. There's a reason why I've played through it four times in under two years.

That said, some of my favorite games of all time don't have the best gameplay then, and it has aged badly since. MGS1, KOTOR1, Mass Effect 2. Probably because what makes a game memorable for the long haul isn't ones I played, but the ones I've experienced.

So does have Witcher 3 have great gameplay? No, and it was my #1 most desired improvement for the updates for Ps4 & XBX that I won't get.

But would I recommend any gamer to play it? Abso-fucking-lutely.

Hey there's a Witcher game with great gameplay you may have not heard about..

It's called Assassin's Creed Odyssey. Check it out some time!

 

[Based and White Pilled]

I JUST bought it for the PC.

Its not bad, but im awaiting the high scored gameplay to come in any time now. Rdr 2 hooked me a hell of a lot faster.

Like that theres Dying Light music tho...a funner game.

If you're looking to be grabbed by a big story, you'll have to wait until you get to the DLC. Imo the main storyline was boring and generic.

The good news, though, is that there are a lot of interesting small plotlines within the main story and the Witcher bounties are often really fun side quests. The other good news is that both of the DLCs are really top notch storylines. Hearts of Stone is much shorter, but it's probably my favorite DLC of any game I've played.

But of course, that's just like... My opinion, man

Edit: I may have misunderstood. If you're looking for gameplay mechanics specifically like combat and crafting, as @GearSolidMetal said, I think you'll be disappointed. Wild Hunt's biggest weakness is the simplicity and repetitiveness of the combat. I would really, really like them to take some inspiration from Dragons Dogma and Shadow of the Colossus for the next one. Get creative with how I can fight bigass monsters.

 

[Bob Gray]

They will change their minds.

Thronebreaker, a Witcher sidestory game, didn't do as well as CDPR had hoped.

I bet they'll make Witcher 4 but with Ciri as the main playable character.

Im thinking the might go with a Witcher game where you create your whole Witcher from scratch. Sorta like Cyberpunk. Give them a history, background, etc. But Im not familiar enough with the lore to say what time period they can do that with. But I got a feeling that theyre gonna distance the franchise from Geralt and his story and characters.

 

[Madmick]

Im thinking the might go with a Witcher game where you create your whole Witcher from scratch. Sorta like Cyberpunk. Give them a history, background, etc. But Im not familiar enough with the lore to say what time period they can do that with. But I got a feeling that theyre gonna distance the franchise from Geralt and his story and characters.

They're out of book, now, so they might as well. Go back to an earlier time when monsters and witchers alike were more plentiful.

Ive put an absurd amount of time in the witcher 3.

Only thing that bothers me is how unbalanced the talents were. You can make some of the less trodden pathways work for shits and giggles, but it's kind of stupid how much more powerful Euphoria & Conductor of Magic builds were than everything else.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Im thinking the might go with a Witcher game where you create your whole Witcher from scratch. Sorta like Cyberpunk. Give them a history, background, etc. But Im not familiar enough with the lore to say what time period they can do that with.

My feeling is the opposite.

In the Witcher series, gamers will be playing as preexisting characters, and the choices gamers are presented with are the options the character could realistically make.

Kinda like how Geralt would never go on a rampage through a city, like we could in GTA.

In Cyberpunk, you play as YOU, through an avatar into that universe.

CDPR likes developed Witcher games for 10+ years, so now they've developed a new franchise its doubtful they'll want to blend the franchises together so they'd be basically the same but with different easthetics (Like Elder Srolls and Fallout).

But I got a feeling that theyre gonna distance the franchise from Geralt and his story and characters.

They can still do that with Ciri as the main character. She's be an empress/witcher (perhaps both, but that's be an interesting choice) with a whole new set of characters and the older characters in Wild Hunt could make cameos.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

If you're looking to be grabbed by a big story, you'll have to wait until you get to the DLC. Imo the main storyline was boring and generic.

@TrueBias

I respectfully and completely disagree with this.

The main story is awesome, and has the feel of an epic fantasy book series adapted into a video game.

I could go on for pages about the plot details and characters, but could it get long-winded at points? Yep, but there's only ONE part (about 30 minutes) of the game I'd say is outright boring.

Spoiler

When Avallac'h and Geralt are traveling through multiple realms. It wasn't fun on the first playthrough, and I just run through it as fast as I could and skip all the cutscenes.

The good news, though, is that there are a lot of interesting small plotlines within the main story and the Witcher bounties are often really fun side quests. The other good news is that both of the DLCs are really top notch storylines.

Agreed.

But I can't recall anyone that's ever played a game based off the praise "but the sidequests are AWESOME!"

The other good news is that both of the DLCs are really top notch storylines. Hearts of Stone is much shorter, but it's probably my favorite DLC of any game I've played.

100% agreed on Blood on Wine. My favorite expansion ever.

With Hearts of Stone, while it was great on my first playthrough I realised it was extremely linear on my second and third playthrough. Didn't even bother with it on my fourth.

Still highly recommended playing it once... maybe twice, and I realized I never leveled up once throughout the entire DLC's story. That was weak.

Edit: I may have misunderstood. If you're looking for gameplay mechanics specifically like combat and crafting, as @GearSolidMetal said, I think you'll be disappointed. Wild Hunt's biggest weakness is the simplicity and repetitiveness of the combat. I would really, really like them to take some inspiration from Dragons Dogma and Shadow of the Colossus for the next one. Get creative with how I can fight bigass monsters.

This.

The most fun way to play the game is to focus on Igni.

 

[mb23100]

This is awesome. Was gonna do another playthrough but I guess now ill wait.

 

[Based and White Pilled]

@TrueBias

I respectfully and completely disagree with this.

The main story is awesome, and has the feel of an epic fantasy book series adapted into a video game.

I could go on for pages about the plot details and characters, but could it get long-winded at points? Yep, but there's only ONE part (about 30 minutes) of the game I'd say is outright boring.

Spoiler

When Avallac'h and Geralt are traveling through multiple realms. It wasn't fun on the first playthrough, and I just run through it as fast as I could and skip all the cutscenes.

I don't think it's bad, but I think the overarching "save the world from the Wild Hunt" aspect of it is pretty generic. Smaller subsections of it were interesting and fun for me.

Agreed.

But I can't recall anyone that's ever played a game based off the praise "but the sidequests are AWESOME!"

Exploration and sidequests are my favorite part of most open-world RPGs. The Elder Scrolls games certainly aren't getting any creativity awards for "save the world from demon portals!" followed by "save the world from dragons!" I feel the same way about all the Piranha Bytes games and Fallout to a slightly lesser extent.

100% agreed on Blood on Wine. My favorite expansion ever.

With Hearts of Stone, while it was great on my first playthrough I realised it was extremely linear on my second and third playthrough. Didn't even bother with it on my fourth.

Still highly recommended playing it once... maybe twice, and I realized I never leveled up once throughout the entire DLC's story. That was weak.

I agree that Hearts of Stone was very linear, but I think that's kind of to be expected considering how much smaller it is. It was basically just a questline and some goodies (crafting runes, armor sets, and I think a few sidequests). I was completely enraptured by the questline, though. I played it start to finish without getting distracted by anything else in-game. That's a big deal for me. I typically get distracted by exploring and sidequests like a puppy with squirrels.

Blood and Wine was basically full-on expansion with a whole new map full of stuff to explore.

This.

The most fun way to play the game is to focus on Igni.

I think I had just as much fun with Aard and Axii, but yeah, signs are the most fun way to play. A mutagen build can be interesting for a bit, but it's tedious. I recommend doing a melee build for a little just to try it out because they're so OP, but they get really repetitive and boring after awhile.

 

[Bob Gray]

They're out of book, now, so they might as well. Go back to an earlier time when monsters and witchers alike were more plentiful.

Pretty much my thinking. Im not familiar with the lore but just from the games it tells you that Witchers are dying out and they used to be more common, etc. Seems like fertile ground for more open world RPGs.

My feeling is the opposite.

In the Witcher series, gamers will be playing as preexisting characters, and the choices gamers are presented with are the options the character could realistically make.

Kinda like how Geralt would never go on a rampage through a city, like we could in GTA.

In Cyberpunk, you play as YOU, through an avatar into that universe.

CDPR likes developed Witcher games for 10+ years, so now they've developed a new franchise its doubtful they'll want to blend the franchises together so they'd be basically the same but with different easthetics (Like Elder Srolls and Fallout).



They can still do that with Ciri as the main character. She's be an empress/witcher (perhaps both, but that's be an interesting choice) with a whole new set of characters and the older characters in Wild Hunt could make cameos.

I wouldnt call it blending the franchises so much as just building a character as opposed to playing a premade one. I get the feeling CDPR doesnt want to "go back" to things and always move forward. I think they're at a place where theyve moved passed Geralt and company and theyre proud of the work they did, but they want to do something else now. I cant say specifically why I think that, its not based on an interview or anything. But my guess is any new AAA Witcher titles are gonna be in a very different time and place.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

I don't think it's bad, but I think the overarching "save the world from the Wild Hunt" aspect of it is pretty generic. Smaller subsections of it were interesting and fun for me.

Agreed about the Wild Hunt being generic villains that needed more development, especially regarding their history with Yennifer and Geralt that was merely touched upon. I never said it was perfect, but overall excellent.

Even GoT had some major flaws in its early seasons.

 

[TribalDrumz]

I tried revisiting this after Ghosts Of Tsushima was a big big nope purely based on combat.

such a shame because the world , characters , factions monsters is unmatched for me but the combat is terrible. You basically do little side steps, weak rolls and the same slash attacks. The sword selection could have beenmagic could have been way more epic .

 

[Based and White Pilled]

Agreed about the Wild Hunt being generic villains that needed more development, especially regarding their history with Yennifer and Geralt that was merely touched upon. I never said it was perfect, but overall excellent.

Even GoT had some major flaws in its early seasons.

And idk if you read the books or not, but there are a few really interesting characters involved with Ciri and the Wild Hunt that could've made for really compelling content in the game. It could've been fleshed out a lot more. To be fair, though, the game had so much content that asking for more is a little crazy.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

Exploration and sidequests are my favorite part of most open-world RPGs. The Elder Scrolls games certainly aren't getting any creativity awards for "save the world from demon portals!" followed by "save the world from dragons!" I feel the same way about all the Piranha Bytes games and Fallout to a slightly lesser extent.

Agreed.

'Save the universe' is far too common of a trope in SciFi series as well.

I agree that Hearts of Stone was very linear, but I think that's kind of to be expected considering how much smaller it is. It was basically just a questline and some goodies (crafting runes, armor sets, and I think a few sidequests). I was completely enraptured by the questline, though. I played it start to finish without getting distracted by anything else in-game. That's a big deal for me. I typically get distracted by exploring and sidequests like a puppy with squirrels.

Same here. The sidequests were pretty good, and 'The Job' was the overall highlight of the quests in the entire expansion.

Blood and Wine was basically full-on expansion with a whole new map full of stuff to explore.

And what a hell of a map it is.

I got really tired very quickly of the fields and swaps of the main map, but Skeliga and Tousant were joys to play in and explore.

I wouldnt call it blending the franchises so much as just building a character as opposed to playing a premade one. I get the feeling CDPR doesnt want to "go back" to things and always move forward. I think they're at a place where theyve moved passed Geralt and company and theyre proud of the work they did, but they want to do something else now. I cant say specifically why I think that, its not based on an interview or anything. But my guess is any new AAA Witcher titles are gonna be in a very different time and place.

We shall see what CDPR decides.

Either way, I won't be like one of those 'We Want 3rd Person Perspective In CP2077! Just like in Witcher! Or we Boycott!' idiots.