I am more curious about how it did on the pc. Both The Witcher and The Witcher 2 actually had pretty good sales considering their pc exclusive/timed exclusive. I know that Xbox one and PS4 owners are hungry for new games, so probably huge sales bump there. Not that it isn't deserved, great game and one of the few games this last year i gladly paid 60 euros for.
My prediction is 50% sales on PS4, 30% on Xbox, 20% on PC.
I think TW3, right from the start marked the end of CDPR's pc-oriented focus. They said targeting consoles made TW3 possible in the first place and I think considering how succesful especially PS4 is, they're just gonna be more and more about consoles from here on, like so many other devs.
As long as their writing is on par and they continue with their Witcher 3 quality then I see no problem in that.
Bring on Cyberpunk! The industry needs a good sci-fi.
Guest_PaladinDragoon_*
If they wanted to grow as company they had to start targeting consoles. If they can grow as a company then in future titles CDPR should have teams big enough to work on both console and PC, They do not have large enough team to work on both consoles and pc versions as of right now. CDPR is still a small company.
If they wanted to grow as company they had to start targeting consoles. If they can grow as a company then in future titles CDPR should have teams big enough to work on both console and PC, They do not have large enough team to work on both consoles and pc versions as of right now. CDPR is still a small company.
Companies pay 5 man teams to port over games, I don't see why a 250-man team that developed their own engine can't still focus on both - especially since everything uses similar architecture and directx12 will make porting over something a guy in his garage could do.
Anyways, well deserved sales for TW3. 
I think overall Witcher 3 was a bit of a drop in quality from Witcher 2 at least in terms of plot. The character writing had improved in a lot of ways (minus some character of course, like Roche, Radovid etc.) but I think TW3's redeeming factor that actually put it above TW2 was its open world and immense attention to detail and not the quality of its main plot. It was decent but it was no Witcher 2 which was a refreshingly well-written complex plot with believable characters and political intrigue all the way through.
http://thewitcher.com/news/view/1056- TY letter from the Devs.
I think overall Witcher 3 was a bit of a drop in quality from Witcher 2 at least in terms of plot. The character writing had improved in a lot of ways (minus some character of course, like Roche, Radovid etc.) but I think TW3's redeeming factor that actually put it above TW2 was its open world and immense attention to detail and not the quality of its main plot. It was decent but it was no Witcher 2 which was a refreshingly well-written complex plot with believable characters and political intrigue all the way through.
It didn't have political intrigue, but on the other hand, a second game in this theme might have been tiring.
I actually like the new Radovid - he won me over when he explained chess to Geralt. This scene is actually crucial to understand why he behaves in such a way - the mage hunts and persecution, and his obsession with Philippa Eilhart were foreshadowed both in the books and in The Witcher 2 - but why he betrayed Keadwen and Henselt? Why he treats everyone like pawns and is paranoid and obsessed?
"Chess is an art of sacrificing your own pieces".
He has no morals now. He simply calculates what he has to do in order to win - and he does it. And the greatest threat is not the enemy, but his own "allies" that can easily become his trap.
And his obsession with Filippa is well justified, considering the fact that no one was as determined as she was to end his life.
As to main plot, I love the variety of characters we meet. The Baron, the Crones, Ciri and Yennefer, Avallac'h, all of the witchers returning with quite significant roles...
And it has some really, really great moments, that previous games lacked a bit in - not only in various subplots, but also in main quest -
Oh, and most of all - the design of Aen Elle is just magnificent. Each and every one of them.
4 Million in 2 weeks is a mental number. Glad to hear it doing well and hopefully it will keep up and allow them to create more awesome stuff in the future
It didn't have political intrigue, but on the other hand, a second game in this theme might have been tiring.
I actually like the new Radovid - he won me over when he explained chess to Geralt. This scene is actually crucial to understand why he behaves in such a way - the mage hunts and persecution, and his obsession with Philippa Eilhart were foreshadowed both in the books and in The Witcher 2 - but why he betrayed Keadwen and Henselt? Why he treats everyone like pawns and is paranoid and obsessed?
"Chess is an art of sacrificing your own pieces".
He has no morals now. He simply calculates what he has to do in order to win - and he does it. And the greatest threat is not the enemy, but his own "allies" that can easily become his trap.
And his obsession with Filippa is well justified, considering the fact that no one was as determined as she was to end his life.
As to main plot, I love the variety of characters we meet. The Baron, the Crones, Ciri and Yennefer, Avallac'h, all of the witchers returning with quite significant roles...
And it has some really, really great moments, that previous games lacked a bit in - not only in various subplots, but also in main quest -Spoiler
Oh, and most of all - the design of Aen Elle is just magnificent. Each and every one of them.
I do wonder about his logic regarding the invasion of Kaedwen. He probably saw the oppertunity for a power grab and decided to gain more land so that he could divide the north between Nilfgaard and himself.
Radovid is actually crazy at this point. I agree that the scene is wonderful, but I'm not sure is wonderful in the way you're thinking.
I wouldn't say he is crazy. It woud mean he doesn't know what he's doing, or that his decisions are completely irrational.
He has a motive for everything he is doing.
I would compare him to Hitler.
Obsessed with hatred toward a certain minority (which eventually constituted to his downfall), amoral but a tactical and strategical genious, able to outplay everyone, or almost everyone else.
He definately was paranoid, he saw enemies everywhere and was almost blind with hatred, but he had a reason for everything he was doing.
And he had a reason for his paranoia. People were trying to kill him. Filippa was out for his head. Sorceresses were still conspiring against him.
I do wonder about his logic regarding the invasion of Kaedwen. He probably saw the oppertunity for a power grab and decided to gain more land so that he could divide the north between Nilfgaard and himself.
My prediction is 50% sales on PS4, 30% on Xbox, 20% on PC.
The number of Metacritic user ratings suggest a rough parity between PS4 and PC (both just a little shy of 2,000 right now), while the Xbone trails severely behind at around 500. Of course, it's possible that PC gamers are more likely to create a Metacritic user rating but there's no real way of knowing this for certain, unless CDPR releases overall sales numbers broken down by platform.
I wouldn't say he is crazy. It woud mean he doesn't know what he's doing, or that his decisions are completely irrational.
He has a motive for everything he is doing.
I would compare him to Hitler.
Obsessed with hatred toward a certain minority (which eventually constituted to his downfall), amoral but a tactical and strategical genious, able to outplay everyone, or almost everyone else.
He definately was paranoid, he saw enemies everywhere and was almost blind with hatred, but he had a reason for everything he was doing.
And he had a reason for his paranoia. People were trying to kill him. Filippa was out for his head. Sorceresses were still conspiring against him.
I wouldn't say he considered dividing the North. He wanted to push Nilfgaard back, and become a sole ruler of the North. As Roche says, he promised restoring the old borders after winning the war - but he definately wouldn't do that.Without him grabbing Keadwen, the North would to too divided to fight Nilfgaard. Temeria and Aedirn were already lost. Keadwen alone would be no match for Nilfgaard, and then Radowid would be left weak and alone. This way he created one strong country in place of two - and used the time to consolidate his forces further. With him being the sole ruler in the North, he hoped that all remaining forces would fight for him.Someone compared him to King Aerys II from GoT - but Aerys was stupid. Radowid had all the insane cruelty and paranoia of Aerys - but the mind of Aegon the Conqueror.
I haven’t finished the entire game yet but the entire hubbub regarding Radovid’s mental, erm, stability is, I think, more a result of there not being enough narrative context to his character arc.
What I mean is that the game doesn’t show, in a convincing way, the development of Radovid between Witcher II and Witcher III. I’ve always felt that Radovid’s character was ‘off’ at several levels, meaning that he was clearly clever and ambitious and capable of ruthlessness, but there was a feeling that he wasn’t entirely rational. This was particularly obvious at the end of Witcher II.
Still, I understand it when some people created an image of Radovid in which he was much more rational and ‘in control’ than he actually was. If CDPR wanted to depict his transformation in a way that would have been acceptable and sensible to a clear majority of the players, they would have had to create more context. We get it he’s clever AND a paranoid tyrant, we can even guess why he became that way, but it would have been better to show that final transformation of his, rather than confront the player with the result of that change. Even Geralt seems to have a ‘WTF?’ feeling when meeting Radovid for the first time in Witcher III.
Comparisons with Hitler are, I think, not entirely relevant; I would rather point at earlier historical European rulers like Vlad Tepes and Ivan ‘the Terrible’. There are some similarities between Radovid’s witchhunters and Tsar Ivan’s ‘Oprichniki’, though the powerful group that is the target of Radovid’s actions are the Mages, rather than the nobility.
The number of Metacritic user ratings suggest a rough parity between PS4 and PC (both just a little shy of 2,000 right now), while the Xbone trails severely behind at around 500. Of course, it's possible that PC gamers are more likely to create a Metacritic user rating but there's no real way of knowing this for certain, unless CDPR releases overall sales numbers broken down by platform.
I don't know if you can use metacritic as good judge on the breakdown of sales however. PC gamers might just be more active online generally than console gamers. It might be interesting to check to see whether the platform breakdown on reviews for games where there are known sales percentages closely align, or whether PC gamers are overrepresented on Metacritic. I think before doing that it would be too soon to draw any conclusion about sales percentages based on platform from TW3's metacritic ratings.
Patch 1.04 is live for Xbox One players.
I don't know if you can use metacritic as good judge on the breakdown of sales however. PC gamers might just be more active online generally than console gamers. It might be interesting to check to see whether the platform breakdown on reviews for games where there are known sales percentages closely align, or whether PC gamers are overrepresented on Metacritic. I think before doing that it would be too soon to draw any conclusion about sales percentages based on platform from TW3's metacritic ratings.
Yeah, I've already posted why I find that TW3 butchered Radovid. Not gonna repeat myself every time over it.
A toast, my friends!
It didn't have political intrigue, but on the other hand, a second game in this theme might have been tiring.
I actually like the new Radovid - he won me over when he explained chess to Geralt. This scene is actually crucial to understand why he behaves in such a way - the mage hunts and persecution, and his obsession with Philippa Eilhart were foreshadowed both in the books and in The Witcher 2 - but why he betrayed Keadwen and Henselt? Why he treats everyone like pawns and is paranoid and obsessed?
"Chess is an art of sacrificing your own pieces".
I dreaded the Chess gimmick they gave him. It was too cliche bad guy to see him sitting nonchalantly with a chessboard and then talking about how the world he rules over are his pawns... bleck, I really thought it was below the standard I found with TW2. His development from Witcher 2, the paranoia when he realized what the Lodge had been up to made perfect sense, but this whole bit where "he has no morals now" felt artificial as **** to me. They took a development from TW2 and waaay overdid it in its continuation.
Trying to understand TW3 Radovid is like trying to catch a rabbit with a spoon.
I'm gonna QFT you on this forever.
Trying to understand TW3 Radovid is like trying to catch a rabbit with a spoon.
Probably the best thing that you've ever said
This week we'll have
Spoiler
Although I have to agree, that they did overdo it a bit. My guess is that they did it mostly to show that North vs. South conflict is not black and white, because living under Emhyr's rule, might actually be better, than living under Radowid's - so they made him more cruel, than he was normally meant to be.
Retour en haut
