Witcher Structured vs Sandbox

I didnt know how else to title this. Basically, until this game came along, to me Gothic series was the criteria by which to compare all other RPGs.
But playing this, I had a feeling that I couldnt place until the middle of chap1.

This game is classic BioWare/BlackIsle 'structured' RPG: Meaning, you dont just run all over the place, go where you want when you want - the plot is structured and breaks down into chapters but within each chapter you have room to move around and explore. This is what I grew up on, D&D and d20 die and all that.

Then came Gothic (well others before but this set the standard) with a 'sandbox' style play. Moreover, it was it's AI, that had people muttering, cursing, making lude remarks, gestures, following a daily routine (breakfast at sunrise, dinners at sunset, etc) and the way the AI seem to watch you and know what you were doing that set a new standard for me.

Thing with Witcher, like most BioWare gems: You are immersed in chaos and like layers of an onion, you have to slowly make sense of it all, peeling away each layer at a time til you know your friends from your enemies, the lay of the land, etc.
Whereas Gothic you start off at 'square 1' so to speak and work your way up and out as your progess in levels. You meet the lower ranking npcs, do some jobs, get promoted then you get to the next level and the playing field shifts again.

Here is the one shining gem in both: Ambiance and AI. Im not a huge fan of in-game music but I love to hear the 'street' of the game. Witcher plays like a Baldur's Gate redone 10 yrs later in that no matter where you go in this game, you get the 'feel' for the environment immediately. From the chit chat of the townsfolk, to the vendors yelling shouting their goods to the kids running around, dogs barking, geese squaking away...to the point where I actually lose all train of thought and just stop in the middle of the street and look around.

Does anyone get what Im saying? This isnt a Gothic vs Witcher post, it's just a comparison of styles. The first thing I noticed in Witcher was that it wasnt a sandbox format, but once I recognized the style at work (THANK YOU for bringing it back!!-not sure what to call it, I just know that BioWare/BlackIsle were famous for it and they used it in all their games: Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, KotOR, Planescape: Torment) I was overjoyed. I like the interaction in Gothic but when BioWare is involved in an RPG, you're pretty much guaranteed a fun ride.

I think the term 'sandbox' is a bit misunderstood. The perfect example of a sandbox game would be Elite, there is no main plot and you are free to play the game in any way you like. There is no way to end the game too. The Sims and Oblivion would also fit the description. So from this point of view, being sandbox is a rather negative attribute for a cRPG, one might argue that not being sandbox is necessary for being cRPG.

Gothics on the other hand keep restricting the player. The world might be open for you to explore but you simply can't go anywhere from the start, take a step in the wrong direction and you're in for a reload. The main plot is very linear too and all the sidequests are linked to the main quest one way or another. What makes the Gothics nonlinear and thus so entertaining is that the order is which you do things matters and there are several ways of doing a single thing which also matter. The order in which you are exploring the world also matters. This is something that no Bioware game has managed to do thus far, one has to go back to Fallout and similar games to make comparisons.

There is in principle nothing that prevents telling an engaging story in an open world. I think the real distinction here is free-roaming vs not free-roaming and linear vs nonlinear. The first distinction is elusive, in the Gothics for example you can in principle go anywhere but you will be having a very hard time to do so until you reach the right level. The second is much more important, Oblivion, despite being free-roaming is a very linear game. Bioware games are also linear, typically offering at most two options, good or evil. The order in which you explore the maps or you do the quests does not matter at all, or the consequences are minor. On the other hand, replaying Gothic will always yield a different experience despite the linear plot. There will always be a new way to do things, explore the world in a different way, see what happens if you betray an NPC instead of helping him etc. So The Witcher is nonlinear despite of it not being free-roaming. Ideally the perfect cRPG should combine both qualities, it's more engaging when the plot is spred across the whole gameworld in a uniform manner. As an example, in Gothic 2 you can go to the Valley of Mines without getting the key, finish the game without joining a guild, enter Khorinis by jumping over the walls etc. Such things are impossible when the game design requires you to complete an area before entering the next.

A great disadvantage of computer vs PnP is that you can't make up the story as you play. This, by the way, is a very interesting topic and maybe it deserves its own thread in the general discussion forum.

I should redefine my terms. I meant to say Non-Linear as opposed to sandbox
Ok, technically, ALL CRPGS could be termed as 'linear' because if they werent, you could (with enough determination and time) load up game, run to end, kill the boss (ya, at lev 1) and game over, in 10 mins. As this would be that company's first and last video game ever, they try to put a slight challenge in between point A (you) and point B (Boss). With that said, if there are better or more standard terms for the styles Im trying to explain, please correct me

Linear: You are locked to a certain zone(s). Paths and roads are pre-determined.
quests are unlocked in a certain order. Fable and Witcher are good examples.

Non-Linear: The game world is totally unlocked. Chain quests are presented in a logical fashion but when\how they are completed are up to you. Except for game-altering events, you can pretty much travel the length of the world, unfettered by the main plot. Gothic and Elder Scrolls are good examples of these.

Sandbox: "Here is the game world, here are the items you will want to use in your game world. Plot? Character development? lol, good luck and have fun."
The Sims, The Guild2 are good examples.

Where I was going with this topic was that in Gothic, whether you persue the main quest or not doesnt prevent you from enjoying the rest of the gameworld. So you could make your own story right at level 1, right after the intro - or at the very least, set the pace to your own degree.
The plus side of this being:
Explore at your own pace
Collect items/weapons out of your range or that you wouldnt have access to in a more linear format.
Allows you to scout the surrounding lands easier.
Plus a slew of other bonuses.
However, I've noticed that because of this freedom, the main plot/quests may not be and in-depth or as intricate or as twisted, but because of the freedom, your mind is on other things and the experience is enjoyable.

Whereas with a more linear, it plays out more like a movie with scripted cutscenes.
You are locked to a certain zone of the world and must perform a set of actions to unlock the new area. You are introduced to key characters in a certain fashion. The roads are set, most gates are locked. Limited space, maybe after you unlock you can come back, most likely you will lose any zone-based quests if you move on or go to the next 'chapter'. Minor downside to this is that it's like 'starting over' for each zone you enter because you are in strange lands and with strange characters (again). World interaction is minimal at best. But the plot and the way it's presented is top notch, and enjoyable to watch.

I have to disagree with most of what you've said.

load up game, run to end, kill the boss (ya, at lev 1) and game over, in 10 mins

Click to expand...

You've pretty much described Oblivion, Morrowind too for that matter. In fact, someone who has played Morrowind and knows exactly what to do can finish the game in less than 15 minutes. You can easily complete Oblivion with a level 1 character. Which brings me to my next point

Non-Linear: The game world is totally unlocked. Chain quests are presented in a logical fashion but when\how they are completed are up to you. Except for game-altering events, you can pretty much travel the length of the world, unfettered by the main plot. Gothic and Elder Scrolls are good examples of these.

Click to expand...

Certainly not. ES is sandbox, Gothic is nonlinear. The key difference here is that the ES games consist of a bulk of unrelated linear quests, on the other hand quests in Gothic are interconnected; how and in which order you complete them affects the gameplay. In the ES games the only freedom you get is to travel from point A to point B in a number of equivalently irrelevant paths and complete their single solution quests in any order you want, the only problem being that whichever order you choose it doesn't matter at all.

Linear: You are locked to a certain zone(s). Paths and roads are pre-determined. quests are unlocked in a certain order. Fable and Witcher are good examples.

Click to expand...

Again wrong. You can achieve nonlinearity through dialogue options and branching plots; The game itself does not have to be free-roaming. If we were to apply your definition then we would have to put The Witcher and the extremely linear NWN in the same category. Obviously they are the exact opposite. By the way, The Witcher does offer a limited amount of free roaming and its seperate areas are like 'small open-ended worlds'.

Explore at your own pace
Collect items/weapons out of your range or that you wouldnt have access to in a more linear format.
Allows you to scout the surrounding lands easier.

Click to expand...

Those would be elements for the definition of 'free-roaming', not 'nonlinear'.

it plays out more like a movie with scripted cutscenes.

Click to expand...

Now the Bioware games come to mind. As fun as KoTOR was you will see practically everything it has to offer after two playthroughs. The fact that you need at least two playthroughs makes it nonlinear, but with a very limited scope. There are other differences as well you will notice with more playthroughs but they are minor. The ultimate creterion for non-linearity is replayability. As fun as an interactive movie might be there is little reason to go through it twice if you will get the exact same experience. On the other hand, each playthrough of Fallout is totally different than the rest. And when a game like The Witcher manages to combine both story and narrative with nonlinear gameplay, that is what it sets it apart.

Personally, I prefer the "structured sandbox" of Gothic (1-2) to anything else. By that I mean that the game layout is a sandbox, but the actual game progression is done in a structured way. In Gothic 3, Oblivion, and so on (real sandbox games), the story tends to fade into the background, instead of being in focus. The Witcher, on the other hand, is far too limited to be called a sandbox, but is very story driven.

I really enjoy exploration, but not at the cost of a solid story. That's why the chapter-driven sandbox style is just about right for me.

I was thinking about this as well, I believe Gothic has a bit better system, as it's chapter based and non linear world, well except Gothic 3 which doesn't use chapters at all. However The Witcher while using chapters has a very closed off world and it's completely unnecessary, afaik and more of the developers choice not that it has any real effect other than limiting. I fully understand limiting forward progress but limiting backwards seems silly, well of course unless the planet you start on get destroyed.

I really don't know what to say about oblivion, except m$ must have been sending free crack to bethesda during, planning and development as Morrowind (with the exception obviously of graphics) was better in almost every way, if not all. They do try to use the Fallout method of having the world open with a MQ that moves the game progress forward, but most design/decsions like the level scaling that allowed you to finish all guild quests and MQ at level 2 and endless others are obsurities.

The only negative about The Witcher that won't be able to fix with patches is the heavy handed and forced responses they gave us to make the game choices seem more balanced to be neither good or evil. There are many examples but the best is the Shanni & Triss quest on where to send Alvin, since Shanni is not even really a choice in this game scenario due to the supernatural nature of the child. The way they have Shanni get mad is ridiculous, not to mention Shanni had already given the boy away once. Instead of forcing nonbelieveable solutions it's much better just to make the quest realistic and face that sometimes, some choices are for the best. Who the hell cares if you structure a quest that has a slightly good outcome, if your willing to make quest that have a slightly bad outcome?

Lethal Weapon said:

As an example, in Gothic 2 you can go to the Valley of Mines without getting the key, finish the game without joining a guild,

Click to expand...

I have heard about getting past the gate without the key, though I can't recall how atm. However are you sure about finishing the game without joining a guild, there have been many discussions on this and many of us have tried and broken the game by attempting?

Maylander said:

Personally, I prefer the "structured sandbox"...

Click to expand...

The point I was trying to make is that the term 'structured' is not sufficient. An adventure game is both linear and structured, an RPG on the hand structured and nonlinear. Free roaming is a different category.

Acleacius said:

I really don't know what to say about oblivion, except m$ must have been sending free crack to bethesda...

Click to expand...

I know it is popular to blame everything to the 'big bad corporations' but I think it is silly to do so. True, it is often the case that their policies don't make any sense, in other cases the lack of competition becomes a problem. There is no good alterative to Windows for the PC for example. On the other hand, Linux is steadily gaining ground and Microsoft must be feeling very nervous regarding the future of its own OS. I wouldn't be surprised if in the next 10 or 20 years the situation will be reversed and Linux becomes the norm. My point is that men are not perfect but they will always find ways to break vicious circles and improve things. On the other hand Microsoft did popularize the PC through DOS and Windows, so not everything about Microsoft can be bad. About Oblivion in particular, my opinion is that its design has more to do with Bethesda as well as the decision to go console, but no one forced them to do so. Although I disagree, they could argue that they made the right decisions.

Acleacius said:

The only negative about The Witcher that won't be able to fix with patches is the heavy handed and forced responses they gave us to make the game choices seem more balanced to be neither good or evil.

Click to expand...

The moral ambiguity and the grey world are the best things about The Witcher!! It is so refreshing after the typical good vs evil dichotomy in the Bioware games. It also resembles real life, how often are we able to be 100% certain that we made the right choice and predict all the results? Note that choices in the Gothics can also be ambiguous, but The Witcher does it much better. By also reading your other posts it's like you're playing a different version than the rest of us, maybe CDP should make a special patch just for you. A better explanation is that The Witcher is not your kind of game, which is perfectly allright, in that case why don't you uninstall it and forget all about it, you're never going to be satisfied no matter what.

Acleacius said:

I have heard about getting past the gate without the key, though I can't recall how atm. However are you sure about finishing the game without joining a guild, there have been many discussions on this and many of us have tried and broken the game by attempting?

Click to expand...

The simplest way is to sneak past the guards and talk to Lord Andre without first joining a guild. He will then give you the key to the Valley of Mines. I didn't finish the game guildless, I was testing if it was possible to join a guild in chapter 3, but I always assumed that on principle this could be done. By the time I had already finished the game several times and I didn't want to try again. I didn't experience anything broken for not joining a guild in chapter 1, but if there is a bug in the last chapters someone correct me. I was getting the mercenary loading screens.

Lethal Weapon

I know it is popular to blame everything to the 'big bad corporations' but ......

Click to expand...

That sounds correct to me, though I wasn't clear as I didn't mean to imply I was blaming m$ due to OS, but the "xbox game design structures" set by m$ to guide/force developmental practices, along with the cash and apparently the crack.
An example would be forcing console versions to be identical for marketing purposes, there by creating a low quality PC version just to be able to get an xbox version out the door.

The moral ambiguity and the grey world are the best things about The Witcher!!

Click to expand...

So true! I think by forcing some situations, takes away from the goodness of the moral ambiguity. They seem to have decided it was better to make unbelievable results on a few quests, which distracts from the very good and successful results on most of the quests. While I haven't finished the game I see no reason for the Shanni & Triss spat/anger/hate quest it's so unrealistic it makes me cringe, but if everyone else is ok with, o'well it must be me overreacting.

The simplest way is to sneak past the guards and talk to Lord Andre without first joining a guild

Click to expand...

Ahh, yes I see what you mean and remember that well.
Yes, the game will break in chapter 3 at the ritual of restoration, well actually a little before as, to the best of my memory Xardas will not come, unless you join a guild.
The breaking point of the quest iirc, is that once in chapter 3 or some point in chapter 3 you can no longer join a guild. It could be a bug, and it would be with Mercs and Pallys, since you can't join the Mages once you start chapter 2.

I actually found a couple ways into the upper quarter (posted back at Dot), where it's possible to jump from the bar roof as transformed beasts (Shadowbest, in my case) onto the pavilion Vatrus speaks from during the day, then it's an easy mantle on top of the wall. And again as a beast in a second place from the highest level of the farm over the Outskirt wall. It sounds like you could skip the whole first chapter, though I never tried it.

P.S. only try these at night, if the whole town is awake they don't like Shadowbeats in town.

You are speaking of Gothic 2, in fact it's possible to enter into mines area since chapter 1 without any morphing, like it's possible to enter in monastery during chapter 1 even without to have the key/door open.

I tried it a little and in fact I doubt You'll be able to make the mines chapter. You can wanderer the area but you'll get only tiny dialogs and no quests. I haven't explored all the mines area but I bet it's the same everywhere. It's not good on a gameplay point of view because when in chapter 3 you'll really need to go there, you won't have anymore the pleasure of discovery.

That's what need to manage opened RPG, seems to be opened but not let player explore everything asap in order to keep more area to discover later as quests progress.