Witcher 4

[Stahlmann]

55 minutes ago, PopsicleHustler said:

Hopefully you're right. It just seems weird to ditch RedEngine when its perfectly working engine, designed for Witcher games.

 

Working on a new AAA project using 3rd party software could prove difficult.

Just because it works with Witcher 3 doesn't mean it'll work as well with newer titles. They had to significantly modify the engine to incorporate changes for CP2077, which is likely one of the main reasons they fucked up the launch the way they did. I don't expect it would be any different for Witcher 4.

 

They likely weighted the options in modifying ther own engine and using a better 3rd party solution and decided the learning curve was worth it.

 

24 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

I have the opposite experience. Every game that ran Unreal Engine was always fluent and with predictable movement and aiming. Especially this later. I played so many games where aiming was so weird and clunky and motion was like you're navigating a tank, not a person. Unreal Engine based games, fluent and predctable, they have that familiar feel to it which I really like. You really have to go out of your way to screw that up in Unreal Engine during game design.

 

Also Unreal Engine games have excellent compatibility. At least in the past. Slap Unreal Tournament 99 on pretty much any PC without any special fixed or patches and it'll just work. And it hasn't got any updates since Windows XP. Most games got broken with Vista and if not with that, with Windows 8 for sure. UT99 just works. Haven't ran it on Windows 11 yet, but my guess is, it would work no problem.

 

So, my prediction is that Witcher 4 will have that same familiar feel and because the engine is already pretty much complete as it is, they'll be able to focus on game design and bug fixing. Where if you're designing engine as well, you keep adding stuff to it and breaking other stuff while doing so. I'm just surprised there aren't any racing games made in Unreal Engine, because driving model in UE has always been awesome. Just remember driving vehicles in UT2004. It was amazingly smooth and predictable...

Again, the engine does not dictate the feel and look of a game in any way. It's the base freamwork enabling and offering the features a game needs. The animations and other things that ultimately make the game feel sluggish or responsive are up to the developers. Unreal Engine supports slow paced and sluggish feeling or slow-paced games like Man of Medan or RPG's like Kindom Hearts just like it does support fast paced shooters like Unreal Tournament or fighting games like Street Fighter. All these games i mentioned use UE and yet these games have nothing in common hinting at them using the same base framework.

 

Just by looking at the Engine you will not be able to tell how good or bad a particular game will work, look or feel. It doesn't work like that. The fact you encountered more responsive games among the ones that use UE is pure coincidence.

 

And for these reasons making any guess on how Witcher 4 will feel or look is completely blind, even when looking at the engine used.

[Stahlmann]

25 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

I'm just surprised there aren't any racing games made in Unreal Engine, because driving model in UE has always been awesome. Just remember driving vehicles in UT2004. It was amazingly smooth and predictable...

Asetto Corsa and MotoGP come to mind. They use UE4. Isn't Asetto Corsa one of the higher regarded driving sims?

[RejZoR]

21 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

Asetto Corsa and MotoGP come to mind. They use UE4. Isn't Asetto Corsa one of the higher regarded driving sims?

I don't know, I only play fun racing games and simulations aren't particularly fun...

 

As for engine, yes, yes it does dictate how game feels. Every game with Unreal Engine 1.x feels the same. Especially motion and aiming. And the way geometry was rendered gave games that familiar feeling. Same with all later engines. They have same predictable feel. Which isn't necessarily bad because the way Unreal based games always felt (good).

Same with Quake 3 Arena based engine. They all felt the same. And again, it wasn't a bad thing.

[Stahlmann]

23 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

As for engine, yes, yes it does dictate how game feels. Every game with Unreal Engine 1.x feels the same. Especially motion and aiming. And the way geometry was rendered gave games that familiar feeling. Same with all later engines. They have same predictable feel. Which isn't necessarily bad because the way Unreal based games always felt (good).

To be clear i don't intend to discuss wheter games feel good or bad. Just going by the 4 examples i listed above there would be no way in hell you'd ever find out that they have a similar base framework. (Without looking at the intro videos) Simply because the devs chose to utilize it in different ways and for different games.

 

Just because Witcher 4 will likely be an open world RPG, that doesn't mean it will feel similar to other UE open world RPG's.

23 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Same with Quake 3 Arena based engine. They all felt the same. And again, it wasn't a bad thing.

This is one engine specifically designed for a particular type of game (id Tech 3). All of these games are shooters or some variations of shooters. Still, i played quite a few of games using this engine and they mostly felt independent, not similar. Quake and Medal of Honor were completely different games, even though both were shooters based on the same engine. Same with the follow-up id Tech 4 engine. Doom (2003) and Brink felt nothing alike. The following iterations of the engine started to blend games together more and more, that's because the next versions were all developed with only very few games in mind.

 

If you want something to compare to UE, look at Unity, another versatile engine. Would you ever expect Fall Guys, Ori, Genshin Impact, COD mobile, Escape from Tarkov, Subnautica etc. to use the same engine from just gameplay?

 

Or look at EA's Frostbite engine. Dragon Age Inquision, FIFA and Battlefield games all use the same engine, yet they're completely different games.

 

That being said, there are engines that lock devs more into a certain feel. But in the end everything you experience as the player is down to the devs and how they envision the game to be, not the engine. And a "better" engine will not warranty a better game.

[suicidalfranco]

1 hour ago, Arika S said:

I'm honestly kind of getting sick of sequels and remakes. give me something NEW.

> Glance at the  posts above

Not gonna happen chief

[Stahlmann]

4 hours ago, Arika S said:

I'm honestly kind of getting sick of sequels and remakes. give me something NEW.

Why throw away such an awesome template as the Witcher world?

 

It doesn't sound like a sequel seeing as they mention "a new saga". And it's certainly not a remake.

[xAcid9]

Please, give me more advance dodging mechanic instead of non-stop rolling like a prick.

[Doobeedoo]

It's not Witcher 4 really. Geralt story s  done. New slate just in Witcher universe. They said that after trilogy. It will be fun to see a new story.

Also yeah move to UE5 is quite a move, exciting none the less.

[Stahlmann]

14 minutes ago, xAcid9 said:

Please, give me more advance dodging mechanic instead of non-stop rolling like a prick.

They also had a dodge step, blocking, parrying and just plain running. What else is there?

[Senzelian]

Usually I don't get hyped about games and I always recommend to not spend any money on pre-orders, but...
 

...

HYPPEEEEEEEE TAKE MY MONEEEEEY 


On top of that a new TES and a few other new and exciting RPGs that are coming within the next couple of years. This gonna be gud!

[Stahlmann]

5 minutes ago, Arika S said:

If its the same gameplay loop with the same gameplay mechanics, might as well just be another sequel. Changing the player character and setting isnt really innovation. 

We'll see. From all we know it could be playing exactly like Witcher 3. But then again it could also play completely different.

 

Never played much of Witcher 2 and never played Witcher 1, but they all seem like VERY different games from a gameplay perspective to me.

[Stahlmann]

3 minutes ago, Senzelian said:

On top of that a new TES and a few other new and exciting RPGs that are coming within the next couple of years. This gonna be gud!

The biggest hurdle for bethesda is to make a better TES game than Skyrim is with mods. Tbh i don't have much faith in them pulling it off.

[Senzelian]

6 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

The biggest hurdle for bethesda is to make a better TES game than Skyrim is with mods. Tbh i don't have much faith in them pulling it off.

Stop it! Don't destroy my beautiful but fragile fantasy world in which I live!

[Sauron]

Now wait for people to start the usual hype circlejerk, having learned absolutely nothing from cyberpunk 2077.

[RejZoR]

51 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

To be clear i don't intend to discuss wheter games feel good or bad. Just going by the 4 examples i listed above there would be no way in hell you'd ever find out that they have a similar base framework. (Without looking at the intro videos) Simply because the devs chose to utilize it in different ways and for different games.

 

Just because Witcher 4 will likely be an open world RPG, that doesn't mean it will feel similar to other UE open world RPG's.

This is one engine specifically designed for a particular type of game (id Tech 3). All of these games are shooters or some variations of shooters. Still, i played quite a few of games using this engine and they mostly felt independent, not similar. Quake and Medal of Honor were completely different games, even though both were shooters based on the same engine. Same with the follow-up id Tech 4 engine. Doom (2003) and Brink felt nothing alike. The following iterations of the engine started to blend games together more and more, that's because the next versions were all developed with only very few games in mind.

 

If you want something to compare to UE, look at Unity, another versatile engine. Would you ever expect Fall Guys, Ori, Genshin Impact, COD mobile, Escape from Tarkov, Subnautica etc. to use the same engine from just gameplay?

 

Or look at EA's Frostbite engine. Dragon Age Inquision, FIFA and Battlefield games all use the same engine, yet they're completely different games.

 

That being said, there are engines that lock devs more into a certain feel. But in the end everything you experience as the player is down to the devs and how they envision the game to be, not the engine. And a "better" engine will not warranty a better game.

Generally all Unity games feel clunky in motion with exact same clunky feel. So, call it whatever you want. Also comparing mobile games where mouse is not a factor is a weird one to build an argument upon it.

 

Of course Doom and Brink didn't feel the same when motion mechanics weren't even the same. But I bet just walking and aiming felt the same. Most devs don't fiddle with default motion parameters, at least that used to be the case which is why all games felt the same motion wise.

[Stahlmann]

1 minute ago, RejZoR said:

Generally all Unity games feel clunky in motion with exact same clunky feel. So, call it whatever you want.

Ori is a platform game with very snappy controls, altough it's probably not a valid game for your comparision because it doesn't use a mouse.

Subnautica didn't feel any "clunkier" than any other first person game. At least to me.

 

1 minute ago, RejZoR said:

Also comparing mobile games where mouse is not a factor is a weird one to build an argument upon it.

I included the mobile game for the sake of showing how versatile these engines can be. And for the example that you'd probably never be able to guess it's running on the same engine as Escape from Tarkov, which is praised for it's realistic and "hardcore" feel. But not because this is what Unity games are like. It's because Battlestate Games decided they want to make the game this way.

 

The reason many indie games look and feel similar is because low-budget productions typically use more of the assets that come with the engine toolset. Big game dev studios generally make their own assets (models, animations, textures) and because of that their games can be completely different, even if the engine underneath is the same.

 

Again, my whole point is: The decisions devs have to make on how their game will feel or look have a lot more impact than the engine they use underneath. The whole reason i brought this up is not because i'm some kind of fanboy of UE5 or CDPR. I just want to make it clear that this engine decision likely won't translate to a specific way a game feels. But it will impact their development efforts. They can use cutting edge technology to make the best of their game, rather than TRY to implement the features they want into their own engine.

 

They made this decision for the same reason Nvidia or Apple don't produce their own silicon. They want to take advantage of the best available tech for the job, but building your own foundry is not worth it. So they use Samsung and TSMC to produce their silicon, just like CDPR will use Epic's UE5 to make their game. 

[TetraSky]

Why is the title "witcher 4" ? It literally isn't Witcher 4.

The Global PR Director at @CDPROJEKTRED had this to say about it

 

[Forbidden Wafer]

3 hours ago, Sauron said:

Now wait for people to start the usual hype circlejerk, having learned absolutely nothing from cyberpunk 2077.

I'll help to shoot them down this time around. Cyberpunk was a complete disappointment at launch.

[Brooksie359]

7 hours ago, PopsicleHustler said:

Hopefully you're right. It just seems weird to ditch RedEngine when its perfectly working engine, designed for Witcher games.

 

Working on a new AAA project using 3rd party software could prove difficult.

I mean most engines have limitations and they probably want to push the envelope and can't do that on their current engine. It's sorta like how Bethesda is going away from their current engine as it was limiting what they could do as far performance and visuals. 

[Quackers101]

it's doomed