Witcher - What if CD Projekt RED Remade it?

Originally Posted by rjshae
I'd almost rather see a prelude game. How did the character get to this point? As I understand it, Witcher picks up right after the final book in the series.

From what I understand their contractual agreement with Sapkowski, the author of the books, was that he gets ownership over the story/characters/lore/etc pre-first game. CDPR did kind of spin off their story for the Witcher, after the last book ends on a kind of hinted final note for Geralt (hope that's not too much of a spoiler; it's actually left to interpretation as to what happens to him). So unless I'm mistaken, CDPR only has rights from their point onwards.

Originally Posted by Couchpotato
That as well they are stuck fixing Cyberpunk 2077, and starting work on it's expansions as well. Anyway it's well known Geralt is a man-whore in the books and games.

We also know CDPR are working on two more unannounced RPG games as well.

It wasn’t the way that Gerald was portrayed it was the way the women were. A man being a whore is a stud a women being a whore is , well a whore.

Anyway I’m a gal I didn’t let myself get to worked up about it since they were avoidable mostly. Being a women who games I sadly know pretty much what to expect.

A remake? I’d probably play it if it was free but I don’t really care if it gets done.

Originally Posted by Imo.
It wasn't the way that Gerald was portrayed it was the way the women were. A man being a whore is a stud a women being a whore is , well a whore.

I think that depends on how you choose to see it. Plus the women weren't just throwing themselves at him. You had to navigate specific dialogue options to make those scenarios happen.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I think that depends on how you choose to see it. Plus the women weren't just throwing themselves at him. You had to navigate specific dialogue options to make those scenarios happen.

It typically took a sentence or two and they were ready to go. Most of the women were clueless and ready to jump in to bed with him. It doesn’t matter though as it’s not the dialogue or the fact that he sleeps with women that’s all fine. It’s that bedding women was turned in to a sport or card game more precisely. Even if they were prostitution and we know why they are there it didn’t need to be turned in to a game. It makes them objects, collectibles. It just sends a message that I find distasteful. As I said though I didn’t care for it and just avoided it.

You’re right though it depends on how you choose to see it and I bet women see it differently than men with few exceptions.

I apologize for taking the thread in this direction though it’s not what the thread is about. I don’t want to take it further off topic than I have already.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I think that depends on how you choose to see it. Plus the women weren't just throwing themselves at him. You had to navigate specific dialogue options to make those scenarios happen.

Nothing against sex in games but with the cards themselves they went overboard. I'm glad they were not in the future games. They did romances in 2 and 3 much better and I would agree with you that in those games getting a sex scene was a challenge, plus you could actually decline and have it have some meaning. But in the first one? No way! Sex cards were just one more collectible.

On the topic of the game itself, I wouldn't call it fine as it is. For me it was a battle against the game with the superb story the only reason to go through it. Passable combat, passable graphics (by today's standards), not so stellar performance even with high end PCs, tons of bugs, confusing questing and a ton of other quirks make it perfect for a remake. Witcher 2 was a huge improvement in almost every aspect.

Not that I would play that remake myself. I know I put aside playing the trilogy because the first game was such an uphill battle I started and stopped the full playthrough 3 or 4 times in 2 years until I finally made myself do it. A remake would be perfect for new players who experienced the same thing I did and just quit the whole trilogy as a result.

Originally Posted by Imo.
It's that bedding women was turned in to a sport or card game more precisely. Even if they were prostitution and we know why they are there it didn't need to be turned in to a game. It makes them objects, collectibles. It just sends a message that I find distasteful. As I said though I didn't care for it and just avoided it.

You're right though it depends on how you choose to see it and I bet women see it differently than men with few exceptions.

Well, fwiw, If the roles were reversed, I wouldn't have cared either way. I think some people simply have an issue with Geralt being male and he was sleeping with females. In today's social climate, I'd be willing to bet there would be less controversy if it was vice versa.

It's a medieval fantasy-fiction world though, and I think it's important to remember that as well. I find it odd when people complain about a fantasy setting not having real-world sensibilities.

Originally Posted by Ivanwah
Nothing against sex in games but with the cards themselves they went overboard. I'm glad they were not in the future games. They did romances in 2 and 3 much better and I would agree with you that in those games getting a sex scene was a challenge, plus you could actually decline and have it have some meaning. But in the first one? No way! Sex cards were just one more collectible.

That's your opinion, and that's fine. The cards were completely optional though. It's not as if you're obligated to do them

Originally Posted by Ivanwah
On the topic of the game itself, I wouldn't call it fine as it is. For me it was a battle against the game with the superb story the only reason to go through it. Passable combat, passable graphics (by today's standards), not so stellar performance even with high end PCs, tons of bugs, confusing questing and a ton of other quirks make it perfect for a remake. Witcher 2 was a huge improvement in almost every aspect..

Again, that's your opinion. I thought TW2 was an improvement in some ways and a step back in others. Some of the things you're claiming are blantantly false though. Tons of bugs? Confusing quests? That doesn't describe The Witcher at all. The original release was indeed buggy, but that was addressed early on with the enhanced edition.

Originally Posted by Ivanwah
Not that I would play that remake myself. I know I put aside playing the trilogy because the first game was such an uphill battle I started and stopped the full playthrough 3 or 4 times in 2 years until I finally made myself do it. A remake would be perfect for new players who experienced the same thing I did and just quit the whole trilogy as a result.

No offense, but I don't think most people are as OCD as you obviously are. If you dislike a game that much, just skip it and move to the next one. You don't need to play TW1 to enjoy the sequels. They're not even a direct continuation of the first game.

Yeah, I don't see it as an issue to get worked up about, but I think perhaps it doesn't suggest the greatest depth in the way relationships are written.

The whole collector's card thing does somewhat smack of pick-up artist douche-baggery, which isn't a big plus for me.

I never played the first one, for a few reasons, (I tend to be super picky) but I would be interested if they remade it, and changed the combat system to either Witcher 3 style or even better, turn based combat.

Otherwise, I would like to play a new Witcher game, but where the protagonist is not pre-set, but we get to make the character from the ground up. And with more variety, like not only having to be a master swordsman/hunter type with spells, but we could choose to be a wizard, or assassin (bring back the Assassin class, damn it! so tired of PC nonsense "oh, the assassin is too scary or evil" - bullcrap) or thief, or druid, etc.

The fact that the developers dumped the card thing and went on to still include sexual relationships in the Witchers 2&3, both serious and one night stand-ish, tells me that they were/are well aware that the approach in The Witcher 1 was crass and immature, and that they wanted to do better. And imo they did do better, much better. The romantic interactions in those two games are better than virtually any such interactions in any other RPG in my opinon. Bioware should have taken notes.

Originally Posted by JFarrell71
The fact that the developers dumped the card thing and went on to still include sexual relationships in the Witchers 2&3, both serious and one night stand-ish, tells me that they were/are well aware that the approach in The Witcher 1 was crass and immature, and that they wanted to do better.

I highly doubt the change had anything to do with them thinking it was crass or immature. More likely, they just wanted to add more depth, and they were probably influenced by the growing popularity of romances in crpgs. It's almost a prerequisite now that any RPG with a story has to have some kind of romance as well.

The sex cards were motivated by trying to have something encapsulate the experience and leave to the imagination, as that is quite a bit of developer time and resources to do it a more immersive way. I look at it the same way as the atypical menu towns in gold box games. An efficient way to depict something when you would rather focus resources somewhere else, like the questing.

The engine was struggling as it was and they only had a few oft repeated 3d models to begin with. Being a cinematic game makes people forget the reality of how expensive and time consuming developing this content can be. They see it as a movie style depiction to criticise rather than a game abstraction due to it being side content. The fact is most people in these games are non-interactive and have no lines whatsoever other than a few generic barks. Something people have pointed out for the first time in Cyberpunk despite it being like this in The Witcher games forever. This is because of the increased cinematic presentation and the hollywood style media expectations that go with this.

Originally Posted by JDR13
That's your opinion, and that's fine. The cards were completely optional though. It's not as if you're obligated to do them

Optional or not, they were a collectible. It's not just that the sex scenes were done in the style of cards, I understand that they were constrained by time/money and the engine itself. It's the fact that you can go to the menu and look at them all neatly stacked up. I haven't seen that in any other game. Other games I played made the sex scenes much more tasteful, which was a very low bar to beat.

Reading through this thread, I feel I'm the only one who feels like the Witcher has run its course, and it's time for new games, with new lore, in new settings. Three games + a Netflix show and whatever comics/novels/spinoffs are out there is already a generous amount of spotlight for something that doesn't run so deep - a white haired dude that kills monsters for a living.

I also think it's better to move on to another franchise. I haven't played CP but from here it doesn't look like there's anything deep, so it could be something entirely new. Sure they'll capitalize on CP with DLCs for those who want more of that, but @Couchpotato mentioned two unannounced RPGs, curious to see what they are.

Originally Posted by Ivanwah
Optional or not, they were a collectible. It's not just that the sex scenes were done in the style of cards, I understand that they were constrained by time/money and the engine itself. It's the fact that you can go to the menu and look at them all neatly stacked up. I haven't seen that in any other game. Other games I played made the sex scenes much more tasteful, which was a very low bar to beat.

What does them being collectible have to do with what I said? If you don't like them, don't collect them. It really is that simple.

Originally Posted by Redglyph
I also think it's better to move on to another franchise. I haven't played CP but from here it doesn't look like there's anything deep, so it could be something entirely new.

Deep in what way? Both TW and CP are pretty deep by video game standards.

Originally Posted by JDR13
Deep in what way? Both TW and CP are pretty deep by video game standards.

I meant rich enough to build on it and have several games with enough story not to be repetitive, I'm not saying it's shallow in that one game. But I may be wrong honestly, is there enough lore to build another game in that universe?

Originally Posted by Redglyph
I meant rich enough to build on it and have several games with enough story not to be repetitive, I'm not saying it's shallow in that one game. But I may be wrong honestly, is there enough lore to build another game in that universe?

I'm guessing you're not familiar with the PnP game. They could probably make an infinite amount of stories in that universe. That said, anything can get repetitive after awhile.

Realistically though, you're probably right about them being better off moving on to something else. Not because the setting isn't deep, but because they screwed up so badly with CP 2077 that I don't think people will trust another CP game from them.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I'm guessing you're not familiar with the PnP game. They could probably make an infinite amount of stories in that universe. That said, anything can get repetitive after awhile.

Good to know, thanks for rectifying.
No, I'm not familiar with it, though I knew it was based on a PnP.