Is it true that CDPR underwent a major organizational shift during and following The Witcher 3?

[Pink Eye]

doesn't mean it was aping Skyrim

https://gamingbolt.com/cd-projekt-red-we-love-skyrim

Yeah, I mean when you say open world, the first game on your mind is normally Skyrim. I hope that in 2015, that will be The Witcher. We love Skyrim, that’s a great game, but I think that they have a totally different approach. At least that’s what I believe, I’m not in their heads, but when I’m looking at Skyrim, for me it’s a great open world with great storylines and great characters in the middle, whereas when I’m looking at The Witcher I have a great main character with a huge story around him placed within an open world. The perspectives here are different, each looks at things from a different angle. Our game will be about you, who you are, how you’re immersing with the world, how you’re interacting with the story everywhere around you, and how this story will influence the whole world.

It 100% was them trying to ape Skryim. I very much remember them saying how much it inspired them back in the day.

 

[Gargaune]

doesn't mean it was aping Skyrim

https://gamingbolt.com/cd-projekt-red-we-love-skyrim

Yeah, I mean when you say open world, the first game on your mind is normally Skyrim. I hope that in 2015, that will be The Witcher. We love Skyrim, that’s a great game, but I think that they have a totally different approach. At least that’s what I believe, I’m not in their heads, but when I’m looking at Skyrim, for me it’s a great open world with great storylines and great characters in the middle, whereas when I’m looking at The Witcher I have a great main character with a huge story around him placed within an open world. The perspectives here are different, each looks at things from a different angle. Our game will be about you, who you are, how you’re immersing with the world, how you’re interacting with the story everywhere around you, and how this story will influence the whole world.

It 100% was them trying to ape Skryim. I very much remember them saying how much it inspired them back in the day.

You do realise that what you quoted literally spells out the opposite, right? "Totally different approach" and so on? Whether it's TES or nü-Fallout, Bethesda's design formula follows a very particular philosophy with regard to systemic design, AI, physicality, combat etc. which developed over the years from its Ultima Underworld influences. There's no stitch of that in TW3.

Don't confuse fiction trimmings for mechanical design. Structurally, CDPR drew on BioWare's Mass Effect for TW2, on Rockstar's GTA for TW3, and on TW3 for CBP.

 

[Pink Eye]

This is what you said:

it wasn't trying to ape skyrim

this is what the article quoting the devs said:

omg we love skyrim, we think its a good game, our goal is to replace it

Are you born with a genetic brain disorder that makes you more retarded than the average dumbfuck that inhabits these forums? Or is this just how you are, you fucking snot eating scum? You presented an opinionated claim that has no basis in reality other then lowering the IQ of the person who attempts to read your nonsensical ravings.

 

[Roguey]

this is what the article quoting the devs said:

What they actually said was "We love Skyrim, that’s a great game, but I think that they have a totally different approach." but you got tunnel visioned about the first part of the sentence that you ignored the last part.

I concur, Witcher 3 feels nothing like Skryim-design-wise, it draws its influences from Ubisoft, Rockstar, and MMOs.

 

[Gargaune]

This is what you said:

it wasn't trying to ape skyrim

this is what the article quoting the devs said:

omg we love skyrim, we think its a good game, our goal is to replace it

Are you born with a genetic brain disorder that makes you more retarded than the average dumbfuck that inhabits these forums? Or is this just how you are, you fucking snot eating scum? You presented an opinionated claim that has no basis in reality other then lowering the IQ of the person who attempts to read your nonsensical ravings.

I think your problem might be a clinically short attention span. For instance, what you quoted up there from me continued with "there's no design overlap with Bethesda's formula beyond 'open world.'" That should've clued you in to what I was talking about, but it didn't. Another example is that you quoted an article titled "cdpr: omg we love skyrim" that went on to quote the developers on how TW3 is different from Skyrim and the interviewer summing up with "the thing that is encouraging here is that CD Projekt RED doesn’t want The Witcher to be a Skyrim clone." That should've told you it doesn't support your point, but it didn't.

lowering the IQ of the person who attempts to read

I don't think you need to worry about that.

 

[Pink Eye]

I think your problem might be a clinically short attention span

That's rich coming from a fucking chicken. You pea brained nipple sucking homosexual.

As to the merits of the article. It was the first thing that popped up when I googled. I for sure remembered years ago of the developers talking about how Witcher 3 is going to be similar to Skyrim; couldn't remember name of interview or article. Maybe I just dreamt this all up, who knows. So I just assumed that article was it then copy pasted here. :shurg:

 

[POOPERSCOOPER]

I'm looking for real adult-ish answers here so please resist the urge to go on some incel rant about trannies or whatever.

Your answer is right there on the image you posted. It's a Polish company with a garbage CEO and CTO, they went woke and paid the toll.

Is this a real pic of the teams? Looks like it's mostly women on Cyberpunk, no wonder they couldn't complete it in time.

 

[Mikeal]

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

You do realise that what you quoted literally spells out the opposite, right? "Totally different approach" and so on?

"when I’m looking at Skyrim, for me it’s a great open world with great storylines and great characters in the middle"
"when I’m looking at The Witcher [3], I have a great main character with a huge story around him placed within an open world"
"The perspectives here are different, each looks at things from a different angle."

Totally different. This is merely the difference in emphasis already remarked upon, where The Witcher 3 still includes many cinematic cutscenes based around the predefined protagonist Geralt. In fact, the interviewer specifically asked "What makes The Witcher [3] different [from Skyrim] as far as its priorities are concerned?" No-one is claiming that The Witcher 2 is exactly like a Bioware game (predefined protagonist and no companions, for a start), that The Witcher 3 is exactly like the later Elder Scrolls games, or that Cyberpunk 2077 is exactly like GTA.

 

[Peachcurl]

I'm looking for real adult-ish answers here so please resist the urge to go on some incel rant about trannies or whatever.

Your answer is right there on the image you posted. It's a Polish company with a garbage CEO and CTO, they went woke and paid the toll.

Is this a real pic of the teams? Looks like it's mostly women on Cyberpunk, no wonder they couldn't complete it in time.

Nah, the upper one is some "let's get all women on one picture" kinda thing, far from being the whole team.

 

[Robotigan]

Holy shit what the fuck is with these new people joining either this year or last year

Joined: May 7, 2021

 

[Gargaune]

"when I’m looking at Skyrim, for me it’s a great open world with great storylines and great characters in the middle"
"when I’m looking at The Witcher [3], I have a great main character with a huge story around him placed within an open world"
"The perspectives here are different, each looks at things from a different angle."

Totally different. This is merely the difference in emphasis already remarked upon, where The Witcher 3 still includes many cinematic cutscenes based around the predefined protagonist Geralt. In fact, the interviewer specifically asked "What makes The Witcher [3] different [from Skyrim] as far as its priorities are concerned?" No-one is claiming that The Witcher 2 is exactly like a Bioware game (predefined protagonist and no companions, for a start), that The Witcher 3 is exactly like the later Elder Scrolls games, or that Cyberpunk 2077 is exactly like GTA.

You're reaching. Skyrim, same as Bethesda's titles in general, is a highly systemic design - persistent NPCs with their own schedules, a high physicality world right down to clutter objects, expansive dungeons accommodating varying approaches to challenges, (relatively) reactive AI routines, etc. TW3 is almost a polar opposite, a largely decorative world with dynamic ambient NPCs, mostly open spaces catered to lock-on TPP combat and perfunctory AI, all of it mostly serving in a supporting role to dramatic scenes and plot development.

In Skyrim, if you see that mountain, you can climb it, and if you see that bucket, you can put it over an NPC's head to steal his stuff. Whereas in TW3, if you see that bucket, you're failing to pay attention to the bodacious babe washing her bouncing boobies in it. Which is a damn sight better than watching GTA5's Trevor being "funny", no doubt, but still the same sort of design pattern.

About the full extent of the similarities between TW3 and Skyrim boil down to "fantasy", "Action-RPG" and "open world." And since the first two were already part of CDPR's Witcher mix, you could only speculate that the last bit might've been in reaction to Bethesda's success, but that certainly doesn't warrant your claim when said open world is structured and plays far more like San Andreas than Skyrim. GTA was always the main inspiration for CDPR's open world design starting with TW3.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Witcher 3 is nothing like skyrim, bethesda open world and ubisoft open world aren't much alike at all and witcher 3 was clearly copying the ubisoft formula. Easily the worst part of the game.

 

[Gerrard]

It was Skyrim that had (pointless) PoIs you were tripping over everywhere you go, so you retards are wrong.

 

[thesecret1]

Totally different.

Witcher 3 focuses on storytelling surrounding Geralt and cinematics. Every side quest features storytelling in relatively heavy manner. Open world content that is NOT related to sidequest is total dogshit (trashmob surrounding a chest with generic loot, typically) and was likely put there as some sort of an afterthought. A completely minimal thing, a side activity that can safely be skipped entirely, without really detracting from the game.

Skyrim has shit writing so naturally, you don't find much storytelling or cinematics in it. Player character is just some murderhobo with no personality of his own. Open world content is the main focus of the game, the player being meant to spend most of his time dungeoneering, sidequests mostly being present just to get you to enter dungeons A, B, and C.

They ARE totally different. Both are open world RPGs, but each handles it in a different (differently shitty) manner and focuses on different things.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

It was Skyrim that had (pointless) PoIs you were tripping over everywhere you go, so you retards are wrong.

skyrim point of interest: a cave you can optionally explore, probably has quests or some loot. Without these, skyrim falls apart.
witcher 3 point of interest: another formulaic item on your open world checklist to complete and mark off that has nothing to do with anything related to the rest of the game whatsoever. Without these, the game is overall improved.

idk how people have trouble understanding the concept of 'ubisoft formula', but you probably shouldn't be calling other people retards if you can't grasp this

 

[MuffinBun]

Witcher 3 is nothing like skyrim, bethesda open world and ubisoft open world aren't much alike at all and witcher 3 was clearly copying the ubisoft formula. Easily the worst part of the game.

Except at Ubisoft they had this brilliant idea that since they are already designing a region with certain pc level in mind, that whole region should correspond to set level.

Meanwhile in vanilla witcher: the bandits you're fighting now are level 13, but the bandits right over there, the exact same bandits, are level 30. So you cant have seamless exploration even where it would make sense, let alone as a design principle. Or do they really expect the player to revisit an area 10h later, just to complete a side activity?

I dont know if there is a mod that would bring coherence to this; I am using one that scales everything to pc level or similar; dont really mind. It reveals that the most difficult enemy in the game in terms of game mechanics, once you equalize stats, is the humble wild dog, especially in packs of more than 4. Very fast and unpredictable.

 

[Robotigan]

idk how people have trouble understanding the concept of 'ubisoft formula', but you probably shouldn't be calling other people retards if you can't grasp this

The people who struggle to distinguish Skyrim from other open world games probably weren't that interested in exploration gameplay to begin with and don't give much credit to games that execute it well. Skyrim and Breath of the Wild devs talk at length about how they tried to get players to navigate over terrain in interesting, non-linear ways and use roadside distractions to entice the player away from rigidly ordered questing. You can tell other open world games don't place this kind of emphasis on their game design because they more or less want the player to progress through the story in an ordered, narratively coherent way. Like you mention, I think the open world in these games is more of a prestige AAA feature than a necessary design component. It's just there to avoid invisible walls and environments that inexplicably arrange themselves into narrow corridors (even though that's exactly how the writers want the player to behave).

 

[Morality Games]

what was w1 trying to be?

Action-RPG with a heavy emphasis on investigation (through exploration and dialogues), preparation, and combat.

Probably the main thing that separated The Witcher from other RPGs is that you weren't just supposed to fight monsters, but understand them.

 

[Robotigan]

Except at Ubisoft they had this brilliant idea that since they are already designing a region with certain pc level in mind, that whole region should correspond to set level.

Set level areas isn't necessarily a bad design decision, but it seems weird in conjunction with an open world. Like two philosophies that are diametrically opposed to each other. Either you want the player to experience your game in a specific order or you want the player to aimlessly meander their way around, which is it? Surely you wouldn't want the player to spend most of their time searching for appropriately leveled content. A little misdirection can be fun, but you'd want the player to spend most of their time engaging with content you explicitly designed to be fun.

 

[Roguey]

It was Skyrim that had (pointless) PoIs you were tripping over everywhere you go, so you retards are wrong.

skyrim point of interest: a cave you can optionally explore, probably has quests or some loot. Without these, skyrim falls apart.
witcher 3 point of interest: another formulaic item on your open world checklist to complete and mark off that has nothing to do with anything related to the rest of the game whatsoever. Without these, the game is overall improved.

idk how people have trouble understanding the concept of 'ubisoft formula', but you probably shouldn't be calling other people retards if you can't grasp this

Skyrim PoIs: locations of particular places

Witcher PoIs: locations of places and also multiple kinds of treasures to collect, random NPCs to help out, monster nests and dens to clear out.

 

[Gerrard]

Um, akshually, Skyrim is supposed to be filled with shit.

 

[MuffinBun]

Except at Ubisoft they had this brilliant idea that since they are already designing a region with certain pc level in mind, that whole region should correspond to set level.

Set level areas isn't necessarily a bad design decision, but it seems weird in conjunction with an open world. Like two philosophies that are diametrically opposed to each other. Either you want the player to experience your game in a specific order or you want the player to aimlessly meander their way around, which is it? Surely you wouldn't want the player to spend most of their time searching for appropriately leveled content. A little misdirection can be fun, but you'd want the player to spend most of their time engaging with content you explicitly designed to be fun.

Its not exactly that, because these are employed at different levels. So they want the player to have the freedom to explore a region, but they also want to retain a set progression between the regions for a more guided story and possibly gameplay development.

They also control the degree of freedom on that meta level: there might be a point where eg at level 10 three different zones for that cap will open, instead of one. But that does not change the fact that some areas are meant for late game, mid game etc.

AC Odyssey has this and it makes for a cool guided experience thats still open. I played it solely as a sandbox and it still felt fine in that aspect.

 

[Robotigan]

Skyrim PoIs: locations of particular places

Witcher PoIs: locations of places and also multiple kinds of treasures to collect, random NPCs to help out, monster nests and dens to clear out.

I think it's telling that in Skyrim you'll typically find the PoI organically before it appears on your map. The marker is a just a convenience feature for organizing places you've already discovered. Whereas in Witcher 3 (the only one I've played), all the markers are unlocked when you check the notice board. In the former, the devs have to put in the effort to make you want to go off the beaten path and check out places you see in the distance. In the latter, it kind of feels like they're trying to reassure bored players that there's stuff to do. If they were confident that each PoI was enticing enough to naturally draw the player, why would they need to display ALL of them? I suspect it's because they realized during playtesting that players were skipping past these places.

 

[MuffinBun]

I think what's important is that both of these designs create a different narrative tone for the adventure. The freeform one lends itself to a more episodic experience where each area is its own standalone thing, whereas the other one is more structured with a stronger implication of purpose and progression (also in region specific gear and enemies).

The issue goes beyond open world games, because as I said its something more meta-level. In bioware games, take DA1, you can pick the order in which you visit different regions/locations, and imo that was not the right choice for this game. Sure, you get the feeling of agency and control, but its restrictive for the writer, who could enrich the experience of visiting each area, if only he knew in which order they'd be visited.