Hello everybody,

While I was watching all the available gameplay videos, it was mentioned several times by developers, that 3rd Witcher will be done in such a way, that you would not need to play previous games - which is disturbing, because usually it means dumbing down content/lore for the sake of "inviting" new players.

I am sick of hearing this mantra in videogames. It actually demeans players who took the time to play the previous games, or brand them with "nostalgia" stamp (just read comments on almost every other forum - except here - or youtube), as if those, who takes the time to actually get into the lore and story of the game would be fools, unable to distinguish what makes those games great and what is "emotional baggage" (if one can call it that way) of remembering, what makes the game great for me personally (i.e. how it was to play that particular game for the first time, if it was or was not revolutionary on some aspect, at that time etc...).

My question is: is this that kind of "innovation" which will make decisions in previous games irrelevant and would not care about those, who played previous games for the sake of newcomers, and if not, what exactly does it mean that this game would be "welcoming for a new players"?

Thanks for answer,

Since that is exactly what they said and did with TW2, I do not expect the result will be any different. I do expect that we will hear more FUD about how this will mean the game will be "dumbed down" from people who think they are entitled to limit the game experience for those who did not play the earlier games.

Substantially all content must be accessible to all players whether or not they have played the previous game. Anything less would not be a game but some kind of expansion pack.

You see, but your argument could be reversed as well: why would I (or people like me) like to have my game experience limited by those, who did not play the previous games?

In W1 it was done by descriptions of lore,/places/characters in your journal, or through optional dialogue choices, where, if you met character from books (like Zoltan), and you didn´t read the books, you could just ask him to introduce himself. Otherwise you would just choose one of he other options.
This is a fairly good approach, IMHO. Plus, I understand and agree that game should be standalone medium, understandable even without the books So if they plan to implement it (being inviting to new players) this way in W3, you can forget about my FUD. I would be completely satisfied with this.

What I don´t understand is why would somebody jump in to the third, and last, instalment of he series, when there are 2 games (not 8, like Ultima or 9, like M&M - in these cases I would understand that one doesn´t want to play all of them, simply because that would exhausting) before that (in case of console players only one), both of them recent (again, No Ultima, No M&M), both of them RPGs (i.e. story-heavy + choices have consequences in later games as well) and both of them are reasons why gamers are looking forward to third one.

I think this kind of approach limits these players themselves, not those, who played previous titles.
I would apply the same kind of approach to whomever would try to teach me thing or two about Ultima (which I never played): I would be more prone to listen to somebody who played most of the games, if not all of them, rather that somebody who played just the last one.

I must admit I have been rather worried about this, unfortunately I can only hope things turn out okay.

It will not make the decisions irrelevant, the developers stated that players will also have the option to make the major decisions from the previous games in some special sequence of Witcher 3 (I think in a similar fashion as in case of Mass Effect 2 on the PS3), rather than being limited to importing saved games. That's a perfectly legitimate solution in my opinion. The players who played the previous games will enjoy the fact that they did experience that stuff first hand rather than learning about it from some summary and they will definitely still get to enjoy their deeper knowledge and understanding of many things in the Witcher universe and storyline. Undoubtedly there will be these little references to previous games that will be enjoyable to veterans and not annoying to new players.

Anyway, in my opinion it would be insane to force all players through the earlier games, especially The Witcher 1 which is completely different in nature and oftentimes awkward and clunky. And as cjgreen stated, CDP said the same thing about The Witcher 2 and it turned out perfectly fine (at least when it comes to the balance between being a sequel and a standalone experience).

Also, even as someone who has played the previous games I will be grateful for the ability to change earlier decisions without having to replay the earlier (and probably worse) games. I also don't feel like replaying TW1 just to have multiple starting conditions in TW2, I would have appreciated a similar feature in TW2. You underestimate several things. The Witcher 1 was a hardcore PC experience, and not even one popular among all PC RPG fans. It was a very different experience than TW2 is and TW3 is going to be. And as I stated above, you can't just force console gamers through that experience. And PlayStation gamers can't even play TW2. It would be insane to make TW3 demand excellent knowledge of the earlier games to be enjoyable.

And keep in mind, those statements that TW3 will be a solid standalone experience are directed specifically at new gamers (after all, CDP NEED the sales of TW3 to beat the ones of TW1 and 2). There is no reason to presume that it also means that the game will thus be a big FU to the veterans.

Okay, I can agree with this.

When I mentioned W1 in my previous post, I also mentioned the possibility of console players, who could play only W2.

All right then, I am calm and patiently waiting for the final product :)

i can never understand people starting a game series at the later games. i had a friend who started metal gear series with mgs4 then decided that it is too confusing, too shity and went back to playing dota. some time later he started mass effect series from the third game

dude.

sorry not that related with topic but i had to say it.

Is anyone worried by the claims that this will be "20% bigger than Skyrim" and "30 times larger" than Witcher 1 and 2? It may lead to a lack of focus.

More worried about the people who think these are to be worried about, when they have never been responsible for the development of anything and know nothing of what they are talking about, spreading FUD.

FUD is contagious. You give it to other people who know even less than you, and they spread it to the still less knowledgeable, and pretty soon an entire community believes some damaging rumor that was never so at all.

To hell with FUD.

Sure I know what I'm talking about. I know what I like and dislike, and I dislike games that are too big and too long. So far, there have been claims (according to calculations) that the Witcher 3 is going to be bigger than Skyrim. I think Skyrim is too big. And so, I am concerned that the Witcher 3 will also be too big. There is no "FUD" here, just some mild concern. So mild, that the most I'll do to express it is by posting in some forum. I'm not going to be losing any sleep over it and I'm not trying to be kill everyone's excitement and anticipation.

If you like I can balance things out by mentioning some positives that I noticed. The Witcher 3 certainly looks good. I find the artistic design to be especially interesting to look at.

I find it concerning as well, but I trust CD Projekt to handle it effectively. My biggest concern is how they intend to handle players personal experiences from Witcher 2 in Witcher 3. Essentially save file imports which present mostly a technical challenge on consoles though it also seems to conflict with CD Projekt's desire to make Wild Hunt more accessible to incoming players.

There has been footage of a creature that

////
////

[spoiler] greatly resembles an undead Iorveth. Granted, this could be a depiction of just one way in which such a scenario could play out in Wild Hunt, but I choose to side with the rebels in Assassins and I hate even playing the other half of Act II because I cannot stomach a world without Saskia or Iorveth and acting as Helsalt's lackey just makes me feel dirty and doesn't even seem to fit with Geralt's character. I also like Roche and he turns out alright regardless. The Rebel path just seems like the most optimal path. The "correct" choice with the preferable outcome [/spoiler]

Spoiler Tagged for character revelations and plot details of Assassins of Kings

////
////

My point is that I greatly prefer to play Witcher 2 a very specific way and the other way just feels wrong. I'm sure there are those who think the same way just opposite of my preferences. It kinda stings having this notion that CD Projekt Red might choose to forcibly disregard the very personal adventure I had as Geralt in favor of insisting on their own telling even after going through such great lengths to make the adventure in Assassins my own.

Regardless of their chosen direction and technical hurdles I hope CD Projekt can rectify these issues.

Furthermore, I don't think we have to worry about the "everything and the kitchen sink just because we can" design mentality undermining Wild Hunt. It seems like developers may have gotten over that and CD Projekt Red doesn't seem like the sort of creative visionaries to run with that notion anyway. From what I've seen of Wild Hunt so far it seems as sweeping and vast as any open world RPG but without the redundancy of games like Skyrim.

The only thing that scares me is how it looks. More to the point how it will run...

The 2 thing that scares me is how it looks and if there will be a mac version of this game.
I have a 2012 Macbook pro retina 15'' (650M nvidia with 1GB and a 4core CPU i7 ivy bridge) and I can play this game (the witcher 2) at medium setting uber-off.
I will be happy if I can run it low settings without bootcamp or vmware.

Since TW3 is a multiplatform title i fear that the gameplay is dumbed down.

Careful you don't contract it yourself.