Witcher 3 - Why I Love the Topography

Aubrielle

Aubrielle

Noveliste
Joined
December 16, 2013
Messages
2,789
Location
1920
PC Gamer explores The Witcher 3's topography, its realism, and its beauty.

​

The Witcher 3 loves to wade through the murk of its magical Middle Ages. Whether Geralt is trudging the forsaken swamps of Velen or topping up his tan in Toussaint, things are always more grim than they seem. A dash of domestic violence here, an avenging spirit there—The Witcher’s world is complex and muddy.

I’m not interested in emotional grime, however. No, every time I play The Witcher 3 I’m hit by its actual dirt: the mud, rocks, silt and sand that make up the Northern Kingdoms.

Immersion comes in part from CD Projekt Red’s incredible textures and facial rigging, but the real legwork is done by topography. And I don’t mean the awesome mountains of Skellige or the great expanse of Crookback Bog. CDPR’s artistry is in the small details.

Even amid the gentle farmland of White Orchard there’s evidence of geological processes at work. Sheer, sandy banks overhang the river, fringes of grass suggesting ongoing erosion. Where many RPGs would dump a river in a convenient trough in the landscape, The Witcher 3’s ragged, crumbling riverbanks convince me that this stream was flowing eons before Geralt wandered by.

When the heavens open, rain spatters every exposed surface. Decades-old games can simulate rain of course, but as the torrent develops, rivulets start to run down rock faces, explaining how their deep crevices developed. Even throwaway items like a quest-specific frying pan catches raindrops as you hand it to an NPC.

Rocks, clifftops, tree roots and all the imperfections that make nature a pain in the arse each get their time to shine. They never feel like assets studding the landscape for variety’s sake, as boulders often do in Skyrim, for example. They are the landscape, born of imagined natural processes. I like to believe The Witcher’s NPCs considered the lay of the land before building their hovels. Roads, for example, typically take the easiest route up a hill, skirting ridges though a straight route would be quicker.
Click to expand...
More information.
 
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
2,789
Location
1920
I can only say that where I live a day without any wind is rare.
The Witcher 3 world sure is windy. And I love it!

Wait wait, it's about topography not climate?
Well... PC. No drawing distance limits. TW3 world looks almost real. While some other platforms advertise their landscapes (recently Uncharted 4) nothing I saw in other games reached what exists in TW3.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
IMO, I love that people's houses and Inns look like people actually live in them. There's decoration and paint on the walls, it looks comfortable, like people are making the best out of things. For some reason, so many RPGs just make everything look like a dank, dirty mess. The visual details are fantastic in this game.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
1,561
Location
Downtown Chicago, IL
Can't wait to play this, along with all the DLC, so I can have a 100+ hour orgy of eye candy and good ol' cRPGin'. But I'm waiting for those new Nvidia 1070 8GB cards to come down in price and become more available instead of these ridiculous "Founder's Editions" retailing for the full MSRP ($445). Fuck dat.
 
Joined
May 18, 2014
Messages
360
It's why Fallout is so tiresome to me. In 200 years, NO ONE swept a floor? Tidied up a room here and there? Painted a wall? Cleared debris? Tried to live a clean, healthy life?

It's just stupid.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
1,561
Location
Downtown Chicago, IL
Ovenall said:
It's why Fallout is so tiresome to me. In 200 years, NO ONE swept a floor? Tidied up a room here and there? Painted a wall? Cleared debris? Tried to live a clean, healthy life?

It's just stupid.
Click to expand...


Both games have good visuals for areas, skyrim can be very lush(with the right mods it looks even more incredible.) I think the difference between the two is exploring in skyrim you were more likely to find something in them hills, where as in The witcher it felt like large fields of enemy encounters….different style of how it was presented of course. Both good but different.
 
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
5,749
That's why I think that it was an indefensibly stupid decision by CDPR not to release Construction Kit.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,721
Ovenall said:
It's why Fallout is so tiresome to me. In 200 years, NO ONE swept a floor? Tidied up a room here and there? Painted a wall? Cleared debris? Tried to live a clean, healthy life?

It's just stupid.
Click to expand...

The timeframe has always been an issue in Fallout. It was okay-ish in FO1, but from FO2 and onwards it didn't make much sense. I just don't understand why they put the rest of the games so long after the initial one, as that should imply greater change than what we see. It's especially jarring in FO3 and beyond, of course, because we explore it in much greater detail.

As for TW3, it really is incredibly well crafted. The level of polish is simply staggering given its size.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
7,586
Location
Bergen
rune_74 said:
Both games have good visuals for areas, skyrim can be very lush(with the right mods it looks even more incredible.) I think the difference between the two is exploring in skyrim you were more likely to find something in them hills, where as in The witcher it felt like large fields of enemy encounters….different style of how it was presented of course. Both good but different.
Click to expand...

Eh, I usually troll Bethesda a bit( well, maybe more than a bit :p)...but instead of pointless arguing, I'd like to see them both learn from one another.
CDPR could improve lighting, create more compelling locations to explore and add more flavor to random encounters.
Bethesda can improve their overall realistic consistency&cohesion of environment/settlement design, npc activity and better use of side quests for world building.
Both need to ditch the scourge of quest markers.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2015
Messages
3,898
Location
Croatia
Ovenall said:
It's why Fallout is so tiresome to me. In 200 years, NO ONE swept a floor? Tidied up a room here and there? Painted a wall? Cleared debris? Tried to live a clean, healthy life?
Click to expand...

Bah! Skewed perspective much? Who would want to do this when you have the compounding power of misery, poverty, despair, doom and ruin? Not to mention anarchy, the threat of an armed population who could steal your stock of food and weapons at any moment, or the threat from radiation and other horrors of the wasteland?

I'm afraid there are simply larger issues at stake in the setting than thinking about tidying up ones room, if one even has one to tidy. :p

I can just envisage it now next up from Bethesda:
- Debris Cleaner DLC
- Wall Painter mod
- Personal Maid DLC (Comes with bobble heads and lasers, but only for extra $$)
 
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
1,975
Location
Australia
I absolutely loved the landscape design! It's the only one of these big open worlds where I never fast travelled, never felt the need. The terrain just looks so real, design-wise i mean, it simply looks like a real place. Like no other game. So i would simply enjoy just riding around, admiring the scenery. Many people complained that the world was a little empty. If you draw a horizontal line through Fyke Island, I can agree it didn't feel quite finished, but the rest was just perfect in my opinion. I would just enjoy the world, all the little details, planning my travels and setting out. Perfect!

Edit: Maybe that's why it took me 10 whole in-game days to complete the game! But hey, it was worth it! :p
 
Joined
Sep 20, 2012
Messages
202
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom