The Witcher 3

[van_gelis]

The only way to develop a game despite all the “breakthroughs” in game development technology is the good old method of "stroking keys on a board". But now really they developed the game as a cross-platform from the beginning. Apart from that I believe they're main concern was the lucrative pc market (no fees to anyone, GoG delivery, advertising Nvidia etc).

Now for the open world there was a lot of debate about this in witcher forums couple of years back.

They even had a poll about this, most of the people there vote in favor for an open or even close to a perfect sandbox world (I remember that cause I did so )_ anyway the game is close to release so let's wait (actually I cant cause I haven’t got anymore finger nails to chow on), but if the game is anything close to DA:I I will invade Poland alone(well maybe with a few million? angry Joe's and Jane's with me) and I will make them develop a W4 .

After all games are for fun right.

[bjornk]

I remember when DA:I came out, people were complaining about the horrendous PC controls (aka. mouse & keyboard). This happens when you develop a game with a controller at hand and the people who recently had a chance to play the game at CDPR studios, have said that the game could only be played with controllers and that the PC controls weren't ready yet. Kinda sounds familiar. We'll see how it turns out.

 

 

[Kaz Aanh]

This is what I call a next-gen game. Not some forced homo-land with a fetch quests.

 

[bjornk]

Apparently they don't want you to kill bandit kids who lead you into trap, great. Fuck it.

[winny257]

I suspect that will the first game, that no mods needed.

1+

 

edit: children kill must absolutely not be, I'm not a sadist.   

[bjornk]

edit: children kill must absolutely not be, I'm not a sadist.

If you think killing a child is sadistic and killing a chicken isn't then you are a fucking hypocrite. There's no difference between killing an animal, an adult or a child. In the world of TW, even killing a monster is no different, as they are nothing but glorified predators.

[winny257]

 

edit: children kill must absolutely not be, I'm not a sadist.

If you think killing a child is sadistic and killing a chicken isn't then you are a fucking hypocrite. There's no difference between killing an animal, an adult or a child. In the world of TW, even killing a monster is no different, as they are nothing but glorified predators.

 

 

you're absolutely right, in real life, would I kill anybody, not even an animal.

even one fly catch I in my house and let them then free.  

[bjornk]

I personally don't like killing things in games at all, even the bad guys, because the world will be emptier when they are gone. But things that are protected by the game and therefore cannot be killed annoys the hell of out me.

[winny257]

I personally don't like killing things in games at all, even the bad guys, because the world will be emptier when they are gone. But things that are protected by the game and therefore cannot be killed annoys the hell of out me.

 

even here I can understand you, but why do you want "unconditional" kill children?

in Skyrim, there was also this "limit", this "limit" but was by modders "cracked"!

this is despicable in my eyes, there is so much to kill in the game, since are not necessarily involved children.

it would mean more beautiful, this modder would have a mod created an evil child to spank the ass.  

[bjornk]

The children I want to kill is the one who lead me into a trap. I see no problem in killing him, he's evil.

[winny257]

The children I want to kill is the one who lead me into a trap. I see no problem in killing him, he's evil.

 

I would grab him to me, Laying over my knee, the belt out of my pants pull and as long as beat on the ass until he green and blue is.

 

then I would throw him in the mud, believe me, this child would never again tempt someone into a trap.

[bjornk]

I expect you to do the same whenever you encounter a baby monster.

[winny257]

I expect you to do the same whenever you encounter a baby monster.

 

LOL a Monster Baby is not Real, with which you can do whatever you want, but a human Child is Real,

because should you draw a boundary!

[bjornk]

 

I expect you to do the same whenever you encounter a baby monster.

 

LOL a Monster Baby is not Real, with which you can do whatever you want, but a human Child is Real,

because should you draw a boundary!

 

So, you think the human child in the game is REAL but the monster baby isn't?! You're funny.

[jxm]

The children I want to kill is the one who lead me into a trap. I see no problem in killing him, he's evil. But I am playing Geralt of Rivia, an established character not of my own creation, and he would not kill a child so easily as I would, as he is not as cold-hearted as me, but a superhuman mutant with a soul of purest gold, though he stillhas  a high body-count. And I understand that if it wasn't a child but a hot chick, he would still bang her, even if she had tried to kill him. That is the Witcher's way

 

Fixed it a little

 

[winny257]

 

 

I expect you to do the same whenever you encounter a baby monster.

 

LOL a Monster Baby is not Real, with which you can do whatever you want, but a human Child is Real,

because should you draw a boundary!

 

So, you think the human child in the game is REAL but the monster baby isn't?! You're funny.

 

 

the child in the play embodies a child in real life, but a monster baby embodies nothing, because it simply does not exist.

as simple is that.

 

edit: everything that does not exist does not affect my conscience.

[bjornk]

 

The children I want to kill is the one who lead me into a trap. I see no problem in killing him, he's evil. <removed a bunch of crap>

 

Fixed it a little

 

There's nothing to be fixed there. What you describe is just YOUR Geralt, not mine.

the child in the play embodies a child in real life, but a monster baby embodies nothing, because it simply does not exist.

as simple is that.

 

edit: everything that does not exist does not affect my conscience.

How about a chicken, a wolf, a bear, a bandit that you've killed countless times in Skyrim? What does your conscience tell you about them?

[winny257]

a chicken have I never killed, a wolf a bear only "then" when they me attacked have!
a bandit is a criminals and thus free wild, go to a camp of bandits and tell me what happened?
they will not invite you to coffee, you'll be attacked by them, so I will defend myself, logical!

[bjornk]

Wolves and bears don't attack you if you keep your distance. Similarly, bandits always warn you not to come close, but you'd still go and kill them. Okay, let's see, the only thing you don't want to kill is a human child, but you obviously have no problem killing everything else. I think I've already told you that you are a hypocrite. I wonder what you would do in case you were attacked by a bunch of children.

[jxm]

 

 

The children I want to kill is the one who lead me into a trap. I see no problem in killing him, he's evil. <removed a bunch of crap>

 

Fixed it a little

 

There's nothing to be fixed there. What you describe is just YOUR Geralt, not mine.

 

 

I have no Geralt ... I mostly just use Sapkowskis ...

 

[winny257]

I think I've already told you that you are a hypocrite. I wonder what you would do in case you were attacked by a bunch of children.

 

this question is redundant just like the answer "on it"!

I know of no game (European) where this happened is. maybe is this in japan or china usual, where children a grown human attacking!

a game with such a violent representation (child killing) would in Germany ** no ** approval getting!

[bjornk]

That was a hypothetical question, couldn't you pretend that you lived elsewhere for a moment? But never mind, you obviously have empathy for the bandit kid who sent you to your death, just because its a human child, but not for a wolf that attacked you. Maybe she was hungry or was trying to protect her family. Perhaps that wolf had a bunch of hungry puppies waiting for their mother to return and you just killed the mother. Good for you, you are a better person than me, obviously.

[winny257]

That was a hypothetical question, couldn't you pretend that you lived elsewhere for a moment? But never mind, you obviously have empathy for the bandit kid who sent you to your death, just because its a human child, but not for a wolf that attacked you. Maybe she was hungry or was trying to protect her family. Perhaps that wolf had a bunch of hungry puppies waiting for their mother to return and you just killed the mother. Good for you, you are a better person than me, obviously.

 

it is possible that maybe I'm a better person.  

in most people, it is such, all she not know is nasty and must be killed. thereafter make she himself thoughts, perhaps it was not nasty,

perhaps even very good, but one forget she, dead stays dead!  

such it is also with the little boy in the game, whence want you know whether he evil is,

it is quite possible that he will be forced by the bandits or that his family is being blackmailed?

[van_gelis]

You can't hurt a children(or any kind of cute creature) in today’s games,cause some mtf (people(sic)) will always trying to ice-skate uphill (blade1)and from the graphical representation of violence, in a game will jump in to reality.
So in pretty much any recent game and also because of the political correctness of today.
The developers are being cautious not to provoke the public or find themselves fined with a huge amount of money or even worst find they’re game sold in local sex stores for 4.99$.
And that is about all there is to it.

[bjornk]

it is possible that maybe I'm a better person.  

in most people, it is such, all she not know is nasty and must be killed. thereafter make she himself thoughts, perhaps it was not nasty,

perhaps even very good, but one forget she, dead stays dead!  

such it is also with the little boy in the game, whence want you know whether he evil is,

it is quite possible that he will be forced by the bandits or that his family is being blackmailed?

That may be the case, but not a valid reason why the kid should be exempt from death. He very well could be the son of a bandit who will eventually grow up to replace his father, and maybe just like his father, he enjoys sending people into a death trap then loot their corpses.

 

Also, if you think that a child shouldn't be killed because he may be "innocent", what makes you think that animals or monsters you kill in the game aren't "innocent"? Geralt, or the witchers in general are nothing but mercenaries trained to kill monsters for money, most players would also turn him into a thief and a looter. Do you think Geralt have any right to judge people in order to decide whether or not they deserve death if they are not "innocent"? Hardly. Not to mention he is a professional monster killer, a "monster" in the eyes of monsters. In the imaginary world of The Witcher, you are lead to believe that monsters are evil and must be exterminated. In the real world, us, humans are probably the only monsters, who'd kill for profit or simply for fun, what would you make of your own kind? In the real world, a human child is practically a baby monster.

 

I also would like to remind you that being incapable of having empathy for anything that you're not familiar with in real life is a dangerous thing, and may potentially lead to xenophobia, among other things. Hope you don't have some xenophobic tendencies as being a "better person".

 

 

You can't hurt a children(or any kind of cute creature) in today’s games,cause some mtf (people(sic)) will always trying to ice-skate uphill (blade1)and from the graphical representation of violence, in a game will jump in to reality.

So in pretty much any recent game and also because of the political correctness of today.

The developers are being cautious not to provoke the public or find themselves fined with a huge amount of money or even worst find they’re game sold in local sex stores for 4.99$.

And that is about all there is to it.

Censoring violence in movies or in video games in order to prevent real world violence is the dumbest idea. The world was a lot more violent place before the Internet, before video games or movies, or even before books. Violence has always been in human nature, all you can do about it is to help people develop empathy, so that they'll know why it's bad. Censoring violence is basically creating a sterile environment. People who were raised in such an environment will never know why violence is bad because they didn't take the necessary vaccination. You'll end up with a nation of people with underdeveloped empathy, which is basically a bomb waiting to explode.