RPGWatch Forums
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 Last »

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   The Witcher 2 - Preview at N4G (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13054)

aries100 March 29th, 2011 22:24

The Witcher 2 - Preview at N4G
 
Cathlin Sentz, N4G Community Manager, talked with Tom Ohle, CD Project's PR man. During their talk, she was shown a preview of Witcher 2: Assasins of Kings. Screenshots included.
Here's two snips from the preview. First one about gameplay:
Quote:

Visiting an area of the game, one that Ohle describes as "a town that, depending on the choices you made before this, you might actually not see at all", we pick up a quest to follow up on some missing young men. Definitely suspicious, and as the Witcher we mostly suspect monsters. While traveling to the destination, we come across guards fighting demons and have the option to sort of skirt the battle and let them continue to fight it out, or dive in. Since the games enemies do not scale there will be times to embrace the flight response, instead of fight.
Second about quests and story:
Quote:

Absent from Witcher 2 are volumes of tiny side quests, opting instead for a smattering of those among meatier questing options. "In the first game there were a lot of quests where you ended up having to run back and forth between areas and you spent a lot of time like that, and then you say 'Oh, yeah it was 80 hours of gameplay'. Well, a lot of that was spent kind of running around the same areas", Ohle comments. "There's a lot more focus on trying to get to the point and spend more time exploring the world or actually being in gameplay."
More information.

Thrasher March 29th, 2011 22:24

Quote:

In the first game there were a lot of quests where you ended up having to run back and forth between areas and you spent a lot of time like that, and then you say 'Oh, yeah it was 80 hours of gameplay'. Well, a lot of that was spent kind of running around the same areas", Ohle comments. "There's a lot more focus on trying to get to the point and spend more time exploring the world or actually being in gameplay.
THAT is welcome news! :) I had to take a long break from the first because of this tedium…

sakichop March 29th, 2011 23:59

Can't wait for this game. I wish reviewers would stop pushing for console version.What's wrong with the pc having one big title to itself that takes advantage of the better hardware.

Zloth March 30th, 2011 02:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by sakichop (Post 1061060205)
Can't wait for this game. I wish reviewers would stop pushing for console version.What's wrong with the pc having one big title to itself that takes advantage of the better hardware.

1. Fewer customers, resulting in less money and less people enjoying your game.

2. More pirates, resulting in less money and less deserving people enjoying your game.

sakichop March 30th, 2011 02:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zloth (Post 1061060248)
1. Fewer customers, resulting in less money and less people enjoying your game.

2. More pirates, resulting in less money and less deserving people enjoying your game.

I understand the financial gain the console can provide but the witcher 1 was pc only and they did pretty well. There's plenty of pc gamers to turn a profit and a lot of console gamers would play it on pc if there's no console version.

JDR13 March 30th, 2011 06:06

Quote:

While traveling to the destination, we come across guards fighting demons and have the option to sort of skirt the battle and let them continue to fight it out, or dive in. Since the games enemies do not scale there will be times to embrace the flight response, instead of fight.
May 17th can't get here soon enough. :)

kalniel March 30th, 2011 11:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by sakichop (Post 1061060252)
I understand the financial gain the console can provide but the witcher 1 was pc only and they did pretty well. There's plenty of pc gamers to turn a profit and a lot of console gamers would play it on pc if there's no console version.

How do you define 'pretty well'? If you mean 'just about covered the costs' then I'd agree. But investors look for more profit than that usually.

JDR13 March 30th, 2011 11:27

I'm pretty sure the first game did more than just cover the cost of making it. Otherwise I don't see how TW2 is getting the AAA treatment and doesn't even have definite plans for a console release.

kalniel March 30th, 2011 13:12

Development costs on TW2 should be significantly lower, and getting investment is easier having proved how popular TW1 was.

March 30th, 2011 13:18

hehe no. W1 have cost 27 Mln PLN. W2 already cost more than 30 Mln PLN :).

Roi Danton March 30th, 2011 14:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damariel (Post 1061060326)
hehe no. W1 have cost 27 Mln PLN. W2 already cost more than 30 Mln PLN :).

So around 7,5 Mio or $10 Mio. Cheaper than I expected.

Tragos March 30th, 2011 14:39

First game generated enough income for people to get paid for their work , so i think the sales were good , CDPR owns the title so what investors ?

kalniel March 30th, 2011 14:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damariel (Post 1061060326)
hehe no. W1 have cost 27 Mln PLN. W2 already cost more than 30 Mln PLN :).

Oops. Wow, thought it was coming in less.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tragos (Post 1061060337)
First game generated enough income for people to get paid for their work , so i think the sales were good , CDPR owns the title so what investors ?

Getting paid simply means you have enough cash flow to pay the salaries, doesn't mean you are making a profit. I don't think they made a loss on TW1, but it wasn't a cash cow.

Even if you own a title you need to get the money from somewhere to pay the developers etc. until you start earning money back from sales. That's where investors come in. In the case of TW1 CDPR were paid mostly by CDProjekt, because first projects are hard to gain investment. Atari probably invested a little as well. With the sequel the series has been established, and proven, so if they wished to use more investment from publishers they would be able to, and on much better terms than they would have been offered for TW1.

crpgnut March 30th, 2011 15:17

I'm replaying TW1 and it's still a lot of fun even with the incessant back and forth. The game just seriously needs to borrow the personal teleports from Two Worlds, then it would be much more fun to play. I try to get as many quests as possible done, in one visit to an area, but still end up running the whole Temple District several dozen times. I'm trying to save enough money to buy the 2nd level armor but 5000 is incredibly hard to come by in Chapter 2.

kalniel March 30th, 2011 15:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by crpgnut (Post 1061060340)
I'm replaying TW1 and it's still a lot of fun even with the incessant back and forth. The game just seriously needs to borrow the personal teleports from Two Worlds, then it would be much more fun to play. I try to get as many quests as possible done, in one visit to an area, but still end up running the whole Temple District several dozen times. I'm trying to save enough money to buy the 2nd level armor but 5000 is incredibly hard to come by in Chapter 2.

I got it, just. Then was skint for the rest of the chapter. Dice poker helps.

sakichop March 30th, 2011 16:12

When searching for the witcher sales figures came across this article.

http://www.next-gen.biz/features/1m-…ret-pc-success



If this is really how they feel this is a company i want to support. It's refreshing to see a company want to reward it's fan base, rather than assume they'll buy the game anyway and cater to the people that didn't like it to try and get new customers at the expense of current ones. (looking at you da2) I for one will be buying the most expensive version, probably 3 one for me and each of my sons. If you liked the witcher at all I don't see how you couldn't support this company.

Tragos March 30th, 2011 16:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by kalniel (Post 1061060338)
Oops. Wow, thought it was coming in less.

Getting paid simply means you have enough cash flow to pay the salaries, doesn't mean you are making a profit. I don't think they made a loss on TW1, but it wasn't a cash cow.

Even if you own a title you need to get the money from somewhere to pay the developers etc. until you start earning money back from sales. That's where investors come in. In the case of TW1 CDPR were paid mostly by CDProjekt, because first projects are hard to gain investment. Atari probably invested a little as well. With the sequel the series has been established, and proven, so if they wished to use more investment from publishers they would be able to, and on much better terms than they would have been offered for TW1.

If we decide to make a game and the game sells enough to cover our wages during for the period of development then we have made a successful game.
Everyone got paid and iirc they made a "profit" of 5.000 .

I don't get the capitalist dream of getting rich and buying more useless crap because you made a good game . Bioware made good money from DAO and you saw what followed …. CDPR can do better without any EA like sharks lashing their sweaty backs.

crpgnut March 30th, 2011 16:18

@kalniel:

Yep, I'm hitting Fence and Bouncer as often as I can. They're the only ones I've found that bet high enough to be worth the effort. One of my problems is that I always buy all the books for ingredients and that takes quite a bit of cash. I sell them back, but I just get 1/5th cashback for used books :) I've got about 3,000 and I know I have a bunch of jewelry I can sell. I've kept all rings since the beginning, so that should get me another 1000 or so. If you could store spare weapons in inventory, then you could get alot more cash. I can sell some badges to Merchant too, for 600. Really enjoying the replay.

@anyone:

I've had the longest set of back to back gaming I can remember. I've played FNV, Divinity DKS, Drakensang TRoT, Two Worlds Two, and now TWitcherEE, without a break. I still haven't tried many of the lesser games either: Torchlight, Venetica, Risen, Alpha Protocol. I've never tried any of the Soldak games, though I plan to some day, at least the demos. It looks like any breaks I take will be purely voluntary, which is really weird but exciting to think about. Outside a trip to real Vegas, I'm leaving the computers behind, my crpg plate looks to be full all year!

kalniel March 30th, 2011 16:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tragos (Post 1061060349)
If we decide to make a game and the game sells enough to cover our wages during for the period of development then we have made a successful game.
Everyone got paid and iirc they made a "profit" of 5.000 .

That's nice, but it still took a $10m investment upfront, and that money had to come from somewhere.

Quote:

I don't get the capitalist dream of getting rich and buying more useless crap because you made a good game . Bioware made good money from DAO and you saw what followed . CDPR can do better without any EA like sharks lashing their sweaty backs.
If CD Projekt didn't make good money then they wouldn't have been able to fund CDPR to make The Witcher. The gaming public will not spend 35 now and then wait five years to get the game they paid for. If you disagree, then you can invest in a publically owned gaming company, of which there are several! (like EA :p)

March 30th, 2011 18:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by JDR13 (Post 1061060274)
May 17th can't get here soon enough. :)

In Norway we'll celebrate it nationwide with parades, speeches, good eating (and drinking) and a lot of fun.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:28.
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 Last »

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch