Nazgren Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 The Witcher 3 is NOT open world. Most of the Reviews I saw or red present the game as an open word game. It's simply NOT OPEN WORLD. In Skyrim you can go from Riften to Markath without any loading screen. In the WItcher 3 you can't, you just can't and by the way the zones, at least the two I have visited so far are relatively small. That's also a downside point and it is very frustrating as for me the main reason I bought the game was because of this open world premise with a map 2 or 3 times bigger than Skyrim. Don't get me wrong the game's intrigue, characters, mini game are very well done, not to mention the sheer beauty of it all. However I am 6 hours into the game roughly and I now understand that the game is not Open World as it was announced. An that sucks! You surely CAN'T go from Riften to Markarth with no loading screens in Skyrim mate. As soon as you approach Riften city gate you get a loading screen to transfer you from Riften space to Skyrim space. Skyrim is not a fully open world in that respect if you take presence of loading screens as a criteria. :EDIT: Ninja'd above! I'll just leave this here...http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/8058/? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WursWaldo Posted February 17, 2016 Share Posted February 17, 2016 That's a mod, not part of the base game. It is like saying NV has better guns than GhostRecon and then listing mods that add guns to NV to prove the point. Also, some map sections in TW3 are equal in size to all of Skyrim. Not having a load screen for fast travel would be like having seamless travel from Skyrim to Hammerfell in a Bethesda game. Additionally TW3 doesn't have load screens when transitioning from exteriors to interiors. That is something Bethesda can't accomplish; despite Todd Howard's lies. FO4 wasn't supposed to have load screens, and what did we get? Answer: Load Screens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nazgren Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 That's because Bethesda's coding abilities haven't improved since morrowind. Same engine, same shitty scripting, very little improvement in graphics, same terrible memory allocation, same terrible post processing. They were good enough for morrowind, oblivion and fallout 3, but since then they haven't improved on anything really. The only major step forward they have made since morrowind was to make a game 64 bit, years after every over dev, including indies. They haven't done anything new since then, nothing innovative or inspired. What does it say about a dev when major aspects of a game have to be recoded by modders to make the game even function? They still have the backwards mentality of making a game for console and porting it to PC as well, when anyone with half a brain cell would do it the other way around. Until they sort all of the above I'm not going to buy another one of there games. There's nothing skyrim does that W3 can't do better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WursWaldo Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) Yeah, they lost me as a FOMO customer. IF I buy any of their future games or dlcs it will be when they are on sale. They have proven to me they are unwilling to advance into modern gaming.The 'Creation Engine' is a joke and Todd Howard played it up for Skyrim. Then we discover it is nothing more than Gamebyro with a few language tweaks they could have done for FO3. And then they used it again for FO4. There is no excuse.When compared to ProjektRed and the REDengine it makes Bethesda look like the second raters they are. REDengine really is a cross platform engine for 32bit and 64bit and the updated REDengine3 can run under PS4 and XBox1. Do I have to point out that ProjektRed is a tiny company when compared to Bethesda yet they can do more with less? :ermm:Bioware used the Unreal Engine for all of the Mass Effect games and now they have moved on to Frostbite3 for ME: Andromeda; the most current engine that was available when development started. Look at what Bethesda does, using the same 12 year old engine and pretending they reinvented the wheel.The last E3 knocked Bethesda off of their pedestal and I've read that Bioware will implement open world into Mass Effect: Andromeda; something was possible before but a massive undertaking with how ME was planned and laid out. Now they have a modern engine at their disposal and not only will they have a new galaxy map that plays like the battle map from DA: Inquisition, they are also adding expanded character creation since Shepard is no longer in the franchise. Oh, and Bioware didn't start development for Andromeda until after ME3. Bethesda used the same engine as Morrowind and worked on FO4 for 7 years; look what they gave players. Within 4 years Bioware has implemented a new engine and the start of a new franchise. From what I've read ME:Andromeda is ready for release but they are doing something Bethesda can't or won't; bug testing. I hope Bethesda is ready for another slap at this year's E3. Edited February 18, 2016 by WursWaldo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jet4571 Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 They still have the backwards mentality of making a game for console and porting it to PC as well, when anyone with half a brain cell would do it the other way around. The truth is the only porting issue is the GUI, the games themselves isn't made for console or PC exclusively. When they compile the executable it is nothing more than a setting to compile for either of the consoles or the PC and all that's needed is to change that setting between versions, it's the same build to be compiled and Gamebryo has had that ability since Oblivion was made if not earlier. The GUI is more console centric simply to save them money in not designing a different GUI for PC which is why in FO4 we are s#*! on with a lack of key rebinds and the GUI has been crap since Oblivion. So Bethesda isn't actually porting a console game to PC but simply not spending money to make a PC exclusive GUI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hedop Posted May 20, 2016 Share Posted May 20, 2016 Sorry for the necro but I haven't checked the nexus forum in forever and was just cracking up so massively when reading your posts. I have never ever seen Bethesda being ripped so mercilessly anywhere. Usually the fanbois chime in and tell everyone how great Bethesda is, that Skyrim is way bigger than the Witcher, that all those random quests are really the soul of any RPG and that it makes sense for some random farmer to tell you he lost his ring while collecting wood somewhere and then you find out he collected the wood in some 5 level deep dungeon with no trees whatsoever on the other side of the map and you go "The f*#@?". Seriously, from the bottom of my heart: thank you for this. Even back in the day I could not stand Skyrim and I have always loathed how they ripped the sould out of my beloved Fallout franchise and how no one said a word. I'm so absolutely happy with CDPR showing them up not only when it comes to showing what is possible but also when it comes to pricing (Fallout 4 season pass 49.99 for stuff no one wants, Witcher 3 18 free DLC plus 2 expansions worth about 50+ hours for 24.99) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted2823877User Posted June 5, 2016 Share Posted June 5, 2016 (edited) Every door, city, cave, etc is a loading screen in Skyrim, and you can't go from Skyrim to Solstheim without a loading screen, how is that any different? Edited June 5, 2016 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts