Please note that new user registrations disabled at this time.

It's like a group of D&D high school virgins got together and made a video game

This forum is to be used for all discussions pertaining to any of the titles or expansions within The Witcher series.
User avatar
Denethorn
Posts: 1327
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: The Space Between
Contact:

Post by Denethorn »

RainSong wrote: What I can't really understand is why so many people in US and western european countries have so big problem with computer games being _mature_ (is being mature a bad thing? I dont think so) and showing _normal_ things for mature people in them. I play computer games for more then 15 years and am bored with the childish approach to them and childish content in them. The Witcher was rated M (Mature) and to mature audience was it dedicated (the developers said it on many occasions). Normal adult person shouldn't be shocked by cursing or sex as these are probably normal parts of his life, so I really can't understand why so many people has problems seeing these in computer games (are computer games for children only? statistics show that most of the gamers are adult people...)
I really take issue with your point here. American censorship can be criticised for its hippocrisy or misplaced values (think Grand Theft Auto and the Hot Coffee uproar), but that has no reflection upon what dcb was trying to say. It is strikingly naive to say that sex and boobies constitutes a mature experience... adult yes, but mature?

As dcb pointed out, giggling high-schoolers can produce something incorporating sex and such like. This may make them "adult" in nature, but mature is a different word entirely. I have not had an awful lot of time to spend playing the Witcher since I purchased it, but I can say I find its treatment of more 'mature' themes to be wholly blunt and meaningless. As dcb pointed out, adult themes seem to have been thrust (no pun intended) into the game in an attempt to make it appear more thematically developed and complex. Ironically their attempts to distance the game from a mass marketed RPG instead resulted in a childish approach to these 'mature' themes.
"I fart in your general direction! Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of elderberries!"
User avatar
BuckGB
Posts: 1576
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2000 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by BuckGB »

Thanks for stopping by, Severian. It's always good to see a developer willing to respond to criticism about their game.

I thought I'd share a few opinions of my own on this topic. As I mentioned in my review, there are a few lines of "adult" dialogue in the game that will most likely spur a shaking of the head or a rolling of the eyes. It's tough to say if this is a side effect of the Polish to English translation (on top of the 20% reduction) or what the team had originally intended but, regardless, I never felt that it detracted from the overall game experience. These moments are few and far between and, aside from the randomly uttered "dwarf cock" and "balls itch" lines, are totally optional. If you're not trying to see how many notches you can put into Geralt's bedpost, then this really isn't an issue.

Just as I don't think the small number of lengthy cutscenes should be used to judge the whole game, I don't think these few lines of obscure dialogue should either. There are mature themes, difficult choices, and great dialogue embedded in The Witcher, but you're not going to really be able to experience them without putting some time into the game and making sure you understand the various factions and what they represent. The conflict between the Order of the Flaming Rose and Scoia'tael alone had me staring at a half dozen dialogue options for a minute or two trying to figure out how I wanted to react. While it might be typical for an RPG to tell the story of two opposing forces, it's not very often that you have the option to pick a side and participate in the slaughtering of innocents for the sake of some deep-seeded racial hatred.

I don't know how Sapkowski presents some of these issues in his novels, but I thought the game did a solid job of forcing me to pick between two evils on multiple occasions. By the time I was headed into Chapter Five, I couldn't have cared less about the few lines of lame dialogue I witnessed 30 hours earlier.
User avatar
Ulfang
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 11:08 am
Location: Morecambe, UK
Contact:

Post by Ulfang »

dcb wrote:It's like a group of D&D high school virgins got together and made a video game full of all the sex they never had, violence they never dished out, and cuss words their parents never let them say. Look, just because it contains elements of sex, extreme violence, and adult humor (and I use that term lightly) doesn't mean it's a "mature" game.

To be honest, I stopped playing at "dwarf cock." Am I a prude? No. Do I want an immersive RPG? Yes. Do pop-culture references and modern cuss words ruin a medieval fantasy RPG for me? Yes. When a game tries to use humor in a tongue-in-cheek kind of way, it can definitely work. Overlord did a good job of this. But when a game tries to use humor to be "tough" and "edgy" it really just comes off as pathetic and annoying.

Not to mention the incredibly awkward voice dialogue. Are the voices themselves good? Yes. Does the dialogue make sense and flow from topic to topic seemlessly? Absolutely not. It is incredibly poor in that sense. Maybe you can argue there's just something lost in the language translation, but really, I think most of us expected much more.
What a load of rubbish. Full of sex?? Hardly! The mature sex content is about 1% of the game! I find it a fun edition especially as you collect the tarot cards of your conquests like an achievements award system. Very amusing.

I can't see how minor things like the sexual content and swearing can ruin a game unless you are, infact, a prude and in that case why are you playing a mature game? I love the Battlestar Galactica series and their use of "frack" to replace the F word is just ridiculous in my opinion. I laughed at first but after a while it was just annoying. Did this spoil my enjoyment of the series? Not in the slightest it's just something minor that takes nothing away from the storyline.

If you don't like the game then fair enough that's your right. Stop playing (I believe you already have) but that should be an end of it. People who like it will continue to play while people that don't like it won't ... end of :)
Xfire: Ulfang
Steam: Metaliator
User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Post by fable »

Ulfang wrote:What a load of rubbish. Full of sex?? Hardly! The mature sex content is about 1% of the game!
You may want to reread dcb's first paragraph you quoted. He's not saying what you claim. When a person uses "it's as if," "it's as though," or "it's like," they don't mean the subsequent clause to be taken literally. If I were to write that "When I read laudatory reviews of Oblivion, it's like the writers were all chained, mindless slaves ordered under threat of the lash to create realms of praise for some despotic ruler," I don't actually mean that any of those (mindless) writers were chained and threatened with physical violence by some D&D overlord to produce their material. I can't say dcb's phrasing is very clear, but he/she appears to be stating that game designers thought they'd seem really mature by including sex and violence.
If you don't like the game then fair enough that's your right. Stop playing (I believe you already have) but that should be an end of it.
If they want to complain by offering their views in a reasonable and coherent fashion, they can do so, and we provide the threads for that purpose. They might well reply to you that if you don't like a thread holding their complaints, it's your right to stop reading their comments--and that should be an end of it. ;)

For myself, I find this discussion interesting, in the way it shows how people with differing standards arrive at very different conclusions regarding the same product. So I'm not about to stop reading, here. I hope others on all sides of this issue won't stop, and won't stop posting, either.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
User avatar
Ulfang
Posts: 116
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 11:08 am
Location: Morecambe, UK
Contact:

Post by Ulfang »

fable wrote:You may want to reread dcb's first paragraph you quoted. He's not saying what you claim. When a person uses "it's as if," "it's as though," or "it's like," they don't mean the subsequent clause to be taken literally. If I were to write that "When I read laudatory reviews of Oblivion, it's like the writers were all chained, mindless slaves ordered under threat of the lash to create realms of praise for some despotic ruler," I don't actually mean that any of those (mindless) writers were chained and threatened with physical violence by some D&D overlord to produce their material. I can't say dcb's phrasing is very clear, but he/she appears to be stating that game designers thought they'd seem really mature by including sex and violence.



If they want to complain by offering their views in a reasonable and coherent fashion, they can do so, and we provide the threads for that purpose. They might well reply to you that if you don't like a thread holding their complaints, it's your right to stop reading their comments--and that should be an end of it. ;)

For myself, I find this discussion interesting, in the way it shows how people with differing standards arrive at very different conclusions regarding the same product. So I'm not about to stop reading, here. I hope others on all sides of this issue won't stop, and won't stop posting, either.
"It's as if it's full of sex?" Okkkkk ... well still it's not .. clearly. Personally I find there are too few games with mature content and I don't just mean sexual experiences. I'm sick of unrealistic games that don't tackle realistic issues. when you play a fantasy game you can't judge it by modern day standards. I think the adult themes have been handled very well and quite maturely.

I still disagree with most of what dcb has said but if you re-read my comments I haven't told him to stop posting or discussing at any point. I merely suggested that there are going to be players who like and dislike such games and players who adore such games. In my expericen from all the forums I post on the game is clearly adored more than hated.
Xfire: Ulfang
Steam: Metaliator
User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Post by fable »

He did post to be provocative, true, but he also had real content. I hope he'll show up again and defend that statement about the sex and violence--though I suspect his argument was qualitative, not quantitative.

So let me ask this, without meaning to change subject: if you had to name one outstanding positive feature in The Witcher, what would it be?

Points for saying "It isn't Oblivion." ;)
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
User avatar
Xandax
Posts: 14151
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Post by Xandax »

fable wrote:<snip>
So let me ask this, without meaning to change subject: if you had to name one outstanding positive feature in The Witcher, what would it be?
<snip>
For me, the story was my main drive to play through the game. I wanted to see where it went and why and how.
I could care less about the sexual content in the game, it is not massive if you choose to play around it which you can for the vast majority of it. It is however something many will focus on when they'll express why they dislike it, but if anything the racial tensions in the game actually play a hugely larger part. Heck, you can even supply drugs to some NPCs to get what you want.
There is so much more to this game then simply that you can bed women if you choose, which I think is why some react as they do to the OP's opinions which I can only disagree with having played through the game.
Insert signature here.
User avatar
dcb
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 9:18 pm
Contact:

Post by dcb »

Hi, I decided to check this thread and answer some of your questions. I still haven't played the game since I last posted, but I'll see what I can do.
Ulfang wrote:"It's as if it's full of sex?" Okkkkk ... well still it's not .. clearly. Personally I find there are too few games with mature content and I don't just mean sexual experiences.
I guess it all depends upon your definition of mature and what you, as a gamer, expect from that. To me, being mature doesn't necessarily mean full of adult themes like sex, violence, and cuss words. I'm not entertained by TV shows like Jackass and the like, nor am I entertained by games like Grand Theft Auto or, say, X-rated porn games where the goal is to have sex with women. I attribute elements from The Witcher, which is full of phrases such as "dwarf cock," "balls itch," "****/****," etc to shows like Jackass. I attribute the mini-games of trying to bed women to such infamous gems as Lesiure Suit Larry. While I have no problem with adult-oriented themes, I consider Jackass and Leisure Suit Larry to rate up there with Beavis and Butthead in terms of "maturity," and I expect that the same people who enjoy The Witcher are the same people who are responsible for making shows like Jackass popular. Sort of pseudo-maturity, if you will. To me, those elements just come across as quite immature, perhaps popular with the same crowd that I associate with teenage angst and rebellion (hence the joking reference to D&D high school virgins).
Ulfang wrote:I'm sick of unrealistic games that don't tackle realistic issues.
Then why don't you play educational games if you want realism? Sorry, but I don't see a world of elves, dwarves, and magic where the protagonist cuts down thousands of foes, sleeps with two dozen women without fear of disease or impregnation, and travels through a world where "dwarf cock" and "balls itch" are common phrases represents realism.

To sum up my views, I wholeheartedly understand why this game is popular. It is definitely different than anything I've seen in recent memory. I think it's popularity is due in large part to the fact that gamers are hungry for something, anything, that's different from the generic/dry strain of RPGs that we have seen lately. However, it has enough weak points for me not to be able to overlook them when forming an opinion about the game. Too often, I think, gamers get placated by a good story. Why can't we have both? Great gameplay should not be sacrified for a great story, and vice versa. Even with the "mature" argument aside, clunky controls, unrecognizable inventory icons, simplistic combat, long loading times, long cutscenes, butchered dialogue, FedEx quests, and a non-interactive world are ALL elements that negatively contribute to many gamer's enjoyment of the game. And these are not just complaints I have - many people have voiced similar opinions.
User avatar
Xandax
Posts: 14151
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Post by Xandax »

Yes, it depends on definition of mature, however if you consistently focuses on the sexual content and the few reference to dwarf anatomy as the "mature content", then you are intentionally bypassing a large part of the games story which involves racial tensions to a degree not usually depicted in a RPG, drug abuse and other such elements which exists an-mass.
...and I expect that the same people who enjoy The Witcher are the same people who are responsible for making shows like Jackass popular.
Well, this is completely wrong and just completely invalidates your entire post.
I care less about Jackass, I do not care much about "lewd" humour etc, yet I throughouly enjoyed The Witcher. What is your explanation for that?

You focus on one minor aspect of the game, claiming it is "as if" it is the majority and the game is made by "high school virgin D&D players". I'm sorry, but what constructive elements you attempted to present are completely lost in my book by your attempts at veiled generalized personal attacks.
So if you want us to take you serious, you'd do well to return that courtesy.
Great gameplay should not be sacrified for a great story, and vice versa. Even with the "mature" argument aside, clunky controls, unrecognizable inventory icons, simplistic combat, long loading times, long cutscenes, butchered dialogue, and a non-interactive world are ALL elements that negatively contribute to anyone's enjoyment of the game.
No - doens't contribute negative to anyones enjoyment ... it does to your enjoyment
As have been said prior - inventory icons are not "unrecognizable" to me, after I have played the game for a while. Simplistic combat - heck most combat in any RPG is simplistic. Click this enemy, click this ability. That they simply choose another route does not mean the game is automatically bad.
Long loading is a problem yes, but waiting 10-20 seconds does not mean the end of the world for everybody. Long cutscenes which you can skip, unlike in many other games, and which to me are actually quite interesting is also not a negative factor.....

So please do yourself a favour, speak only for yourself, no masked attempts at personal attacks by derogatory putting down an entire playerbase and if you want to judge the games "mature" content on your preconceived notions of the developers or your sole focus on sexual content then please be prepared to conscider the rebuttals.
Insert signature here.
User avatar
dcb
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 9:18 pm
Contact:

Post by dcb »

Xandax wrote:Yes, it depends on definition of mature, however if you consistently focuses on the sexual content and the few reference to dwarf anatomy as the "mature content", then you are intentionally bypassing a large part of the games story which involves racial tensions to a degree not usually depicted in a RPG, drug abuse and other such elements which exists an-mass.
"racial tensions to a degree not usually depicted in a RPG"

Racial tensions are not usually depicted in an RPG? I always thought dwarves vs elves and half-orcs versus everyone else was pretty standard. Games like WoW where you have the Horde vs the Alliance are racially motivated. Most D&D settings have very high racial tensions. I can imagine there a plenty more examples, but racial tensions in fantasy RPGs is probably pretty common.
Xandax wrote:Well, this is completely wrong and just completely invalidates your entire post.
I care less about Jackass, I do not care much about "lewd" humour etc, yet I throughouly enjoyed The Witcher. What is your explanation for that?
You're right, I was generalizing.
Xandax wrote:No - doens't contribute negative to anyones enjoyment ... it does to your enjoyment
Yup, I edited this after I posted my response and apparently after you quoted me. I changed it from "anyone's" to "many gamer's."

Xandax wrote:As have been said prior - inventory icons are not "unrecognizable" to me, after I have played the game for a while.
Okay, but they are to me, and to many other people. *shrug* I'd assume if a large portion of a game's userbase commented that an aspect of a game was less-than-satisfactory that the game's developers would want to hear about it and take it into consideration for possible fixes and/or changes in future games.
Xandax wrote:Simplistic combat - heck most combat in any RPG is simplistic. Click this enemy, click this ability. That they simply choose another route does not mean the game is automatically bad.
I didn't say it's automatically bad. It is, however, less than ground-breaking and not anything I consider a "masterpiece" as so many fanbois are quick to vote.
Xandax wrote:Long loading is a problem yes, but waiting 10-20 seconds does not mean the end of the world for everybody.
It takes several minutes for me. Maybe you can blame me for not having a $3,000 state-of-the-art system to play on, but I meet or exceed all minimum system requirements, so my complaint is quite valid.
Xandax wrote:Long cutscenes which you can skip, unlike in many other games, and which to me are actually quite interesting is also not a negative factor.....
My problem with cutscenes is this - game developers often use cutscenes to relay the game's story or specific details about a character or other event. If I wanted to watch a movie, I'd watch a movie. If I wanted to interact with the environment, I'll play a game. Sitting idly by while a game relays it's story through a non-interactive cutscene, no matter how good it looks, is akin to watching a movie. Games are supposed to be interactive. In the few hours that I played The Witcher, the majority of time was spent watching cutscenes. If you choose to skip them, you miss out on story elements or perhaps plot points or even what you're supposed to do next.
Xandax wrote:So please do yourself a favour, speak only for yourself, no masked attempts at personal attacks by derogatory putting down an entire playerbase and if you want to judge the games "mature" content on your preconceived notions of the developers or your sole focus on sexual content then please be prepared to conscider the rebuttals.
Any generalizations I make about the players or developers doesn't invalidate the negative aspects of the game I have been discussing. You're right though, in that generalizations are not needed, and I will remove them from future posts. I was pretty annoyed by The Witcher after reading such glowing reviews. I guess I expected more/different than what I actually got.
User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Post by fable »

My problem with cutscenes is this - game developers often use cutscenes to relay the game's story or specific details about a character or other event. If I wanted to watch a movie, I'd watch a movie. If I wanted to interact with the environment, I'll play a game. Sitting idly by while a game relays it's story, no matter how good it looks, is akin to watching a movie. Games are supposed to be interactive. In the few hours that I played The Witcher, the majority of time was spent watching cutscenes. If you choose to skip them, you miss out on story elements or perhaps plot points of even what you're supposed to do next.
I cannot speak to The Witcher, but this neatly summarizes why I dislike cutscenes so much, and especially long cutscenes in games: they are a cheap way (creatively speaking) around the problem of building a coherent, detailed gaming RPG environment. They are not cheap when it comes to financial cost, however, and the money spent on them could in my opinion better be spent on game development, itself.
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
User avatar
BuckGB
Posts: 1576
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2000 10:00 pm
Contact:

Post by BuckGB »

fable wrote:I cannot speak to The Witcher, but this neatly summarizes why I dislike cutscenes so much, and especially long cutscenes in games: they are a cheap way (creatively speaking) around the problem of building a coherent, detailed gaming RPG environment. They are not cheap when it comes to financial cost, however, and the money spent on them could in my opinion better be spent on game development, itself.
I think what you're referring to are pre-rendered cinematic sequences. Aside from two cinematics created by Platige Image (the introduction and conclusion), all of The Witcher's cutscenes are rendered within the game. I don't see how these are cheap from a creativity point of view or expensive from a financial point of view. Most modern games have cutscenes, as they tend to be an effective way of telling a great story.
User avatar
Xandax
Posts: 14151
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Post by Xandax »

dcb wrote:<snip>
Racial tensions are not usually depicted in an RPG? I always thought dwarves vs elves and half-orcs versus everyone else was pretty standard. Games like WoW where you have the Horde vs the Alliance are racially motivated. Most D&D settings have very high racial tensions. I can imagine there a plenty more examples, but racial tensions in fantasy RPGs is probably pretty common.
<snip>
Common perhaps, but not consequential as it is in The Witcher.
Dwarves and elves in this game are not versus each other, and the D&D setting allows for racial tension, but I do not recall a computer game implementation of D&D which have dwarves and elves rising up and killing civilian human, taking children hostages etc.
As for the Warcraft setting, that is hardly comparison either. That would be like saying that Space Marines and the Aliens in Quake demonstrate racial tension.
dcb wrote:<snip>
I didn't say it's automatically bad. It is, however, less than ground-breaking and not anything I consider a "masterpiece" as so many fanbois are quick to vote.<snip>
When you include a combat system as a negative, you do it because it is "bad".
And "fanbois" will always vote masterpiece, however "haters" will always vote against it, so *shrug*, hardly a choice of word I'd use.

dcb wrote:<snip>
My problem with cutscenes is this - game developers often use cutscenes to relay the game's story or specific details about a character or other event. If I wanted to watch a movie, I'd watch a movie. If I wanted to interact with the environment, I'll play a game. Sitting idly by while a game relays it's story through a non-interactive cutscene, no matter how good it looks, is akin to watching a movie. Games are supposed to be interactive. In the few hours that I played The Witcher, the majority of time was spent watching cutscenes. If you choose to skip them, you miss out on story elements or perhaps plot points or even what you're supposed to do next.
<snip>
I have no problem with cut-scenes if they convey story, are well done and especially if they are "skip-able". Cut-scenes in this game does indeed tell the story yes, but it does so because the player himself isn't able to do so.
I've yet to see a game which would be able to allow the player to make choices unguided. The player simply is never knowledgeable enough to advance through a story. Many of the elements of The Witcher requires knowledge of being a Witcher, and there is no way the game would be able to allow the player to "advance the story" on his own.
And if we then compare to practically any CRPG out there, then dialogue options and story advancement is always guided by the game. I've seen many times where you only have one dialogue option you need to press to advance a story - and that is not interactivity, that is stupidity.

Games interactive scope is choosing dialogue option 1, 2 or 3. And when only one option actually exists then the game could just as well flow through it.

Of course if one dislikes them, then it will cause issues with the gameplay - but again, that is a purely subjective and individual decision. I found the cut-scenes well done and good for advancing the story.
dcb wrote:<snip>
I was pretty annoyed by The Witcher after reading such glowing reviews. I guess I expected more/different than what I actually got.
Well, now that is hardly the game or the developers fault.

I expected little outside some hack n' slash RPGish game, and what I got tuned out to be so much better then the majority of the RPG field out there.
Insert signature here.
User avatar
dcb
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 9:18 pm
Contact:

Post by dcb »

BuckGB wrote:I think what you're referring to are pre-rendered cinematic sequences. Aside from two cinematics created by Platige Image (the introduction and conclusion), all of The Witcher's cutscenes are rendered within the game. I don't see how these are cheap from a creativity point of view or expensive from a financial point of view. Most modern games have cutscenes, as they tend to be an effective way of telling a great story.
Do you play a game to interact with an environment or to non-interactively watch a story unfold which you have no control over? Do you understand that one is a game and the other is essentially not? Interactivity is what differentiates a game from a movie. If you do not have control over your character in a cutscene, you aren't playing the game. Your characters acts as the game designers want him to act, in pre-defined, static movements and dialogue. In a sense, you are no longer playing the game, but watching a movie.

Like I said, they may be great to look at, but you are still just watching a movie. Great games, ones that I consider masterpieces, involve interactivity to tell the story to the player. Yeah, I'd love to watch a 2 hour movie of the Witcher, but I paid for a game (read: interactivity), so I don't expect the majority of my play-time to consist of watching movies. I want to play a game.
User avatar
Xandax
Posts: 14151
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Post by Xandax »

fable wrote:I cannot speak to The Witcher, but this neatly summarizes why I dislike cutscenes so much, and especially long cutscenes in games: they are a cheap way (creatively speaking) around the problem of building a coherent, detailed gaming RPG environment. They are not cheap when it comes to financial cost, however, and the money spent on them could in my opinion better be spent on game development, itself.
To have another mechanism to convey story advancement like this is impossible given current technology and knowledge of the player.
Cut-scenes are a mechanic just akin to limiting dialogue options. So I do not see the issue with them, when they are used properly - as I feel they are in this game.

We must remember that CRPGs are not PnP, and are limited by the scope of artificial control, or rather control via proxy, via scripts and coding based on the developers idea of how the game will flow. I've yet seen a game interactive enough with a story compelling enough to allow the player free reins and not restrict him, lest there was a real life GM in control.

Interactivity in games will for many years be limited to what the developers what the player to achieve, meaning which direction they take through the "main" story of a game. You do not have the option to ask every person about everything you want.

Also The Witcher is more an interactive story, so cut-scenes actually do work quite well. You are The Witcher, and you play his story. You do not create your own character, name him what you want and "role play" that character, you roleplay The Witcher.
Insert signature here.
User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Post by fable »

BuckGB wrote:I think what you're referring to are pre-rendered cinematic sequences. Aside from two cinematics created by Platige Image (the introduction and conclusion), all of The Witcher's cutscenes are rendered within the game. I don't see how these are cheap from a creativity point of view or expensive from a financial point of view. Most modern games have cutscenes, as they tend to be an effective way of telling a great story.
I would, with respect, disagree. When I play a game, I don't want to see a movie, and when I worked on a game (an MMORPG), we took pains to incorporate our plots and themes into the environment. You might get a bit of it from a tale told by an innkeeper, or a statement by a royal spokesperson might include something. Another bit could show up in a cleared away cave-in. The point was, the story was told from within, not shown to you from without. It's harder to fit it into the game world, and it takes a lot more creativity (in that sense of the word) than it does just to write a script and make a cutscene of any type. But I think the ultimate sense of involvement and the pleasure felt by the players who pieced the plot together was worth all the effort. :)
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
User avatar
Xandax
Posts: 14151
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Post by Xandax »

dcb wrote:Do you play a game to interact with an environment or to non-interactively watch a story unfold which you have no control over? Do you understand that one is a game and the other is essentially not? Interactivity is what differentiates a game from a movie. If you do not have control over your character in a cutscene, you aren't playing the game. Your characters acts as the game designers want him to act, in pre-defined, static movements and dialogue. In a sense, you are no longer playing the game, but watching a movie.
The character will always act within the framework of the developers choosing, either by limiting dialogue options - even down to one or two options, closing off paths to areas you can't visit, or simply not placing plot-critical advancements until you reach a specific stage in the game.
Do you "play the game" then? Or do you not just follow pre-defined dialogue/path?
Remember, all dialogue is, is scripting. It is pre-determined paths down a tree.
It is all limited in scope.

There is conceptual no difference between selecting one option and reading a wall of text, then there is to watch a (long) cut-scene depicting the same story advancement. Save personal dislike towards one over the other.
Insert signature here.
User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Post by fable »

BuckGB wrote:I think what you're referring to are pre-rendered cinematic sequences. Aside from two cinematics created by Platige Image (the introduction and conclusion), all of The Witcher's cutscenes are rendered within the game. I don't see how these are cheap from a creativity point of view or expensive from a financial point of view. Most modern games have cutscenes, as they tend to be an effective way of telling a great story.
When I play a game, I don't want to see a movie, and when I worked on a game (an MMORPG), we took pains to incorporate our plots and themes into the environment. You might get a bit of it from a tale told by an innkeeper, or a statement by a royal spokesperson might include something. Another bit could show up in a cleared away cave-in. The point was, the story was told from within, not shown to you from without. It's harder to fit it into the game world, and it takes a lot more creativity (in that sense of the word) than it does just to write a script and make a cutscene of any type. But I think the ultimate sense of involvement and the pleasure felt by the players who pieced the plot together was worth all the effort. :)
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.
User avatar
dcb
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 9:18 pm
Contact:

Post by dcb »

Xandax wrote:To have another mechanism to convey story advancement like this is impossible given current technology and knowledge of the player.
A GM-controlled NWN 1&2 games do this quite well. For this reason, I LOVE the idea of what NWN offers. Yes, the game itself has several limitations, but the idea of a real-life dynamic storyteller is definitely a huge step in the right direction of CRPGs, IMO.
Xandax wrote:Cut-scenes are a mechanic just akin to limiting dialogue options. So I do not see the issue with them, when they are used properly - as I feel they are in this game.
They are too long, which I agree is arguable depending on your taste, but another gripe of mine is that every conversation with an NPC sucks you into a cutscene type dialogue interface, completely removing you from the game world. Why does it have to do that? Sure, the blur effect looks amazing on the background, but is it worth the sacrifice of immersion, interactivity, and freedom in order to have pretty graphics? I don't think so.
Xandax wrote:Also The Witcher is more an interactive story, so cut-scenes actually do work quite well. You are The Witcher, and you play his story. You do not create your own character, name him what you want and "role play" that character, you roleplay The Witcher.
This is true, and I have no problem with it. In fact, I don't have a problem with the linear storyline in The Witcher at all, I just feel that there are many unnecessary, overly-long cutscenes with broken dialogue. That really ruins a lot of the enjoyment for me.
User avatar
Xandax
Posts: 14151
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2000 12:00 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Post by Xandax »

fable wrote:<snip> we took pains to incorporate our plots and themes into the environment. You might get a bit of it from a tale told by an innkeeper, or a statement by a royal spokesperson might include something. Another bit could show up in a cleared away cave-in. The point was, the story was told from within, not shown to you from without.
<snip>
If the innkeeper tells you a bit of a tale, then what is the difference if he does so either via text or a cut-scene?
Same same in my opinion.
fable wrote:<snip>
It's harder to fit it into the game world, and it takes a lot more creativity (in that sense of the word) than it does just to write a script and make a cutscene of any type. <snip>
Sorry, but that is not correct.
There is no more creativity involved in writing up some story elements and getting the innkeeper to tell it via text, then there is getting it shown as a cut-scene of the innkeeper telling it to you.
fable wrote:<snip>
But I think the ultimate sense of involvement and the pleasure felt by the players who pieced the plot together was worth all the effort. :)
And you can't piece together plots from a cut-scene?
Insert signature here.
Post Reply