Yeah, inflation is a thing. But so is increasing volumes in sales with low cost distribution of the product.
After a game is made now, the only cost is distribution now, and games sell in larger volumes than ever before, making more money than ever before. A game like BL4? Even if they spent $300,000,000 making the game they only need to sell 6,000,000 copies to recoup costs at $70. BL3 has sold 18,000,000 copies. A huge profit, even if most of those sales were on sale prices. BL3 was made and advertised with a 140 million dollar budget.
Not to mention, all of the dlc that’ll inevitably be released, following every other borderlands game pattern. Wonder what they’ll try to set the prices of those at
Oh boy the only issue I have is that I’m going to be unstoppable, Ciri is literally a broken main character nearing her full potential.
Bitch can fucking dimension travel, trained in sword and fight by other witchers and IIRC Yennefer trained her in some sort of sorcery arts as well so it’d be like having an OP mix of Geralt+Yennefer
So I recently devoured the book series and can clarify, she was first trained as a Witcher, then as a sourceress by Yennefer, but after she was teleported into the middle of the desert and tried to use fire as a source of power out of desperation, she gave up all magical abilities as the fire was trying to consumer her. So shes a brilliant swordswoman, has partial Witcher mutation (some of the mutations come from the secret Witcher diet which she was fed at Ker Moren while being trained) and depending on when in the timeline the game takes place she would have incredible reflexes and some interdimensional travel capabilities.
There’s also some really interesting opportunities for storytelling given how Ciri’s background is just soaked in trauma. On that note, I am also curious if they intend to play down the salaciousness for this entry or not. In the books Ciri was definitely curious (and heavily implied to be bi) but remained a virgin, and by the end of the series she was still a minor by modern standards. I want to say she was 16 or so at the end of the last book.
I’m super excited to see where this game goes, because if its worthy of being released after the masterpiece that was The Witcher 3, it’s going to be brilliant
With regards to Ciri’s age, she’s 21 during the main events in The Witcher 3.
At the end of the books she’s 17.
No idea if they’ll play down the salaciousness or not, but given when the game will likely take place that at least won’t be any issues with the main character being a minor.
“You can’t just have Geralt for every single game.”
I mean… Yes. You literally can.
Mario, Sonic, Zelda, Metroid, Kirby… You can create infinite video games with the same main character over and over again. Its like an infinite money glitch if the character is popular and well liked.
What happened to him in the end? I remember her sacrificing herself to the winter, but all I remember is Geralt living and then the post game DLC. Maybe I got the really weird ending, haha
There were multiple endings depending on the choices you make throughout the game. Same for the two DLCs.
The ‘good’ endings were in the base game she confronts the winter and succeeds, returns to Geralt as a father figure, and lives on as a witcher. Then in the Blood & Wine DLC, Geralt basically retires in his own vineyard.
They need to release a fake “Witcher 4” that’s just an older Geralt moping around his vineyard bitching about how his knees hurt. All of his quests would be things like pestering his workers about how badass he used to be, going to town to return a watermelon to the fruit vendor because of a mushy spot he didn’t notice when he purchased it, shit like that.
All the while, the townsfolk would slip idle chatter about crazy shit that Ciri’s doing off camera.
Honestly, as a stopgap that just releases out of nowhere for the sole purpose of building hype for the actual Witcher 4, kinda like how Bethesda did with their random vault dweller mobile game, I’d be all for it.
Geralt could go on a Gwent tour… but what’s this? Upon entering this new land of Walachia, some bandits stole his Gwent deck while he was asleep in his camp. And he had the ultra rare nude Triss card in it, too! Open, The Witcher 4: a quest for cards and vengeance.
All of those games’ characters are essentially just mascots though (other than samus). So they’re not really an applicable comparison for continuing a character long term in a story focused world that tries to be somewhat grounded in terms of consequences and passage of time.
Yeah, Geralt and Yen “dies” and may or may not be saved by Ciri’s power at the end of the series. Ciri is the pivotal character in the story, Geralt is really just there trying to find her.
I haven’t bought full price games in ages. Games are always released half finished now. Wait six months to a year until it goes on sale and they actually finish the game.
I honestly can’t remember the last time I paid full price for a game. Between free amazon prime games, epic games, gog, and steam demos/freebies: I hardly have time to invest in new games.
I used to buy Madden/NBA2k every year up until 2008 or so, now I grab one every five years at $10. Includes all the bugs from the previous version.
I have 1000s of games now and don’t have any time to play them. BG3 is the only game I’m considering spending $40 for.
I’ll gladly buy indies, breakout titles with huge reception (BG3, E33 etc), or games from well renowned studios that have yet to let me down. Anything else I’m fine waiting for a sale. With these $80 price tags I don’t see myself buying a AAA title again for a LONG time.
CDPR hadn’t let me down. Yet. Ultimately, they redeemed themselves, sure, but at launch… whew, there were issues.
Game companies CAN redeem themselves. Business wise though? Its hard to recoup that kind of shaken faith in investors, board members, etc; let alone the people you’re actually trying to sell to.
There are so MANY fucking games out there these days, that I’ll look at something new, and decide I don’t like certain elements of the gameplay, and just move on.
If a feature looks more frustrating than fun? I’m good, thanks.
I’ve played hard games on the hardest setting for the challenge. I’ve also played “easy” just to get drunk and enjoy a story.
If it isn’t fun though? Then what am I doing here?
I already spend 8+ hours a day on the computer and hate it, but at least they pay me.
yea, but BG3 didn’t release in a complete state. With that said, Larian has delivered on their promise and that’s really a good example of how a AA/AAA title can do early access in a good and healthy way.
Not gonna lie, I was hoping they’d use some Law of Surprise stuff to give Geralt a new ward and let you create your own Witcher. But, if instead I get to do teleport strike bullshit with Ciri’s powers, I’ll be content.
It’s about time women got more accurate representation in games. How many games have you play as a man compared to playing as a woman? Technically it should be 50/50 to more accurately represent the real world.
I don’t think representation is the main issue, it is more about how they are presented.
Striding for a perfect 50/50, doesn’t really sense if they are all just stereotypes and sexual objectified. Also there are many other underrepresented population groups.
IMO, it is more important to focus good well written and complex characters, that represent real circumstances right.
I don’t complain that AAA studios have gone ‘woke’ because they now include choices to select from marginalized groups, I complain about them because they are often do not offer a deeper perspective of people in that group and are just different skins.
In some way, I can understand, games often happen in a Fantasy world, but I would wish that selecting different characters would do more than just exchanging the player mesh, texture and voice pack.
The well written part is my concern. Or we will get the same quality as a lot of recent movies and shows. Where the characters are stereotypes, poorly written, poorly developed. With plot points that are just randomly forced into the story, and that plot point has nothing to do with the rest of the story. You know the ones, where something has been added to the story and has no reason or meaning or benefit to being part of the story.
Unless you are also complaining about it when white male characters are also surface-level, 2-D, copy-and-paste characters then all you are saying is “Only white male characters are allowed to be simple or a stereotype/trope.” Lets be honest, not every game needs a complex and well written character, and that is fine. If they choose to go that route it doesn’t matter what race, religion, or gender the character is in the first place. So it doesn’t matter if they are a white male, a latina woman, or a black non-binary person.
Now I’m also not gonna shut down your solution without being constructive and providing my own solution, cause I don’t think quotas are the answer either. Instead we should be uplifting and empowering marginalized creators and game designers so that they can make more characters that they want to make. Which is generally characters they can relate to. If people want more characters that are women, then the game industry needs to become a safe space for women and empower them so they can provide more representation for characters. Same thing for any other demographic. That will make sure that these characters are being made in an aethentic and organic way, and not just being pumped out to meet a quota, but also isn’t restricting when marginalized demographics can be used as characters.
Unless you are also complaining about it when white male characters are also surface-level, 2-D, copy-and-paste characters then all you are saying is “Only white male characters are allowed to be simple or a stereotype/trope.”
What? Where am I saying that?
Yes I would complain about all kind of stereotypes. Even the “white muscular tough guy” could be considered sexual objectification. IMO CoD is sometimes pretty gay coded.
Lets be honest, not every game needs a complex and well written character, and that is fine. If they choose to go that route it doesn’t matter what race, religion, or gender the character is in the first place. So it doesn’t matter if they are a white male, a latina woman, or a black non-binary person.
I wasn’t saying that. You can have games without a single character. Or where the character doesn’t really matter, because it just an empty shell you are driving around and not more.
But IMO I mostly play story driven RPGs, where you are someone, and where you want the environment to react to you. It would be awesome if when you run around with colorful hair or tattoos, it would slightly change the disposition of the NPCs or cause them to comment on your appearance. Don’t let this stuff be just cosmetics, it should be more meaningful, and embedded into the game world.
That’s why the trailer has me so hyped for this game. It looks like the game is going to be different because Ciri is the protagonist. Her experience, reactions, and approach to saving a young woman from being sacrificed are totally different than what Geralt’s would be. I hate it when games like Mass Effect are like “Oh! You can play as FemShep! That totally counts as representation!” even though it changes literally nothing about the story.
I want more games that actually address the real and significant differences in the experiences and perspectives of different characters. I’m always disappointed when there’s a “female” option that’s just a re-skin of the male character with no changes in how the character interacts with the world and the story. (This happens a lot in non-video game media too.)
Video games are not the real world. They do not have to follow the rules of the real world. Even if parts or all of the game model the real world, video games are artwork, and artwork invents its own rules. Trying to enforce rules onto art has not worked well in the past, and will likely not work well in the future either.
I bought borderlands 2 the other week and it’s been a blast on my SteamDeck. Unfortunately it seems it’s one of those games that loves to connect online all the time, like it’ll kick me out of single player if it detects wifi and make me reload into… singleplayer, but online. with 0 differences.
I probably would’ve been better off pirating it tbh.
I’m mad about Ciri being the main character, however the reason I’m mad is not because of her character or her being a woman. What I’m upset about is that I thought this game would take place in a completely different time period or region. Like maybe during the first witchers? Maybe in the future? But no, CDPR is just force extending existing characters and a story that clearly ended. Zzzzz
Yes. The games already retconned the ending of the books, which was pretty finalized. But whatever, the games were good. But now they’re just force extending an already forced extended storyline rofl. I was hoping for completely new characters in a completely new settings/time period. Such a fucking shame.
They made such a big deal about the witcher 4 not being about Geralt and being it’s own story, and now they’re just extending Ciri’s storyline. Pretty braindead decision in my opinion. It feels like they are just lazy and gave up on making a new character.
It’s the same bullshit that has ruined hollywood. It’s safer to just reboot some bullshit or force a sequel vs. coming up with something new and original.
I’m not saying doing another Witcher game in general is a forced sequel. But using the same damn character is definitely a forced extension.
Quite the opposite for me. Having only random ass characters in the story would kill all my hype. Also I wished for Ciri as MC in the next game ever since I player W3, so for 10 years now.
My dream witcher game is set like 150 years in the future (early industrialized time period of the witcher universe.) And there could be tension as guns are invented and witchers aren’t needed as much. How great would that be?
Wanted to mention - The Season of Storms Witcher book has a short flash forward to around 150 years in the future, and they’re starting to burn fossil fuels. That’s where I got the 150 years.
Why complicate things ? Games are not books. I see Witcher game I expect Geralt. What is wrong with this thinking ? Do I need to think everytime I play Horizon ? No when I play Horizon I expect Aloy.
There is nothing to do with woke. If you expect people to read books before they play a game there is something wrong with you not with people who want to play a game with their favourite character.
Geralt needs retirement. The ending of Blood and Wine expansion, tells you that loud and clear, and agree with that. It was a perfect ending for the Trilogy.
Ending with Ciri following the Witcher path, is Canon now. I dont agree with the decision of Ciri becoming a Witcher (not making her the protagonist, but her taking the Mutagens), but i want to see how they explain that turn of events.
That’s the problem, they want to put Ciri in same gameplay but different story and say that’s new Witcher. I would more likely play as Yenefer sorceress and slay monsters in a Witcher game than play as Ciri that somehow becomes a Witcher just to slay monsters with as sword. We already have character that slays monsters with a sword in Witcher game, he’s called Geralt.
Ending with Ciri following the Witcher path, is Canon now
It’s canon in the books too. She was trained at Ker Moren, then trained by Yennefer but ultimately she gives up her magic entirely after pulling from fire as a source out of desperation. She remains an extremely skilled swordswoman with partial mutation
I dont think its necessarily to complicate things but more that we’ve had Geralt as a main character for 3 games. His time is ending, and if you love him as a main character there are those 3 aforementioned games you can play to get what youre looking for. Switching up the main protagonist to another character that we as gamers have learned to love and accept through the series is probably the best move, both for business and canonically.
The Witcher game series is based on the book series.
The post criticizes not the expectation of players that haven’t read the books, but of the subset of people that think making Ciri the protagonist is a political message, when it’s just staying true to its source.
Your critique has nothing to do with this post.
Expectations differ from person to person. You see the games as a separate thing. They are obviously not. But it’s totally fair to want another witcher game with Gerald with his story continued. If the original creator of the story didn’t write it that way, then CD Project Red would have to come up with their own story. Straying too far from source material can end badly - see Game of Thrones seasons 6-8.
Nah the author of article asume that all people that say that Ciri can’t be a witcher it’s because they claim it’s woke and tries to turn those who disagree to say it’s political. I clearly state it’s not. I don’t want Ciri in Witcher because I want to play Geralt. That’s all. The author puts books to afirmate his claims that only people who read books are worthy to say something about Ciri being a Witcher protagonist and that everyone else says it’s woke. No I disagree. Books are not Games.
It’s a game series (and later media series) literally based on a series of books. The short stories tell Garalt’s story, but the longform books are far more about Ciri than they are Geralt. Go read them they’re brilliant books but more important to the point you’ll understand why Ciri is so important to the story that’s being told
I didn’t even buy Borderlands 3 for $60 and there’s no way in hell I’d pay $80 for something similar. I spent the full price of Baldur’s Gate 3 for myself and two of my friends for a total of $180. Make the game worth it and you have my money. If the development cost of games has gone up then prove it and make better games.
It and it’s DLC sold just fine because BL3 is miles above BL2 in gameplay (though yes it’s story and voice acting are painful, 2 hasn’t aged as well as many of us might remember it did in that regard, either)
Tbh I expect the same thing for this one: better gameplay, worse writing
Having seen the tonal shift in the gameplay preview I’d actually expect better writing, or at least more bearable writing. Gameplay looked more fine tuned but mostly the same as 3.
I won’t. Nobody is able to define what “wokeness” really means to them because it’s mostly code for “subset of people I don’t want to exist around me”.
Surprisingly, that doesn’t sound very good when said out loud.
“Woke” has had a consistent meaning since its introduction into the English language almost a hundred years ago. It means “Aware of systemic racism.”
When blues legend Lead Belly ended a show in 1938 by saying, “Stay woke,” he meant: “Stay aware of systemic racism.”
When some chud on YouTube in 2025 says “‘Woke’ is ruining gaming,” he means that awareness of systemic racism is ruining gaming. For him.
And when an American politician calls himself “anti-woke”, he’s saying that he opposes the awareness of systemic racism. Not that he denies the existence of it, but that he’d prefer no one talk about it, so that it can continue.
When some chud on YouTube in 2025 says “‘Woke’ is ruining gaming,” he means that awareness of systemic racism is ruining gaming. For him.
I don’t think it even goes that far tbh. Especially for less political, more gamer-type “conservatives”, it just means “the other side”, forcing so many girls (1) into their game. Maybe it’s just to deflect having to admit to being a misogynist.
And when an American politician calls himself “anti-woke”, he’s saying that he opposes the awareness of systemic racism. Not that he denies the existence of it, but that he’d prefer no one talk about it, so that it can continue.
Yes, exactly. No sane person would call themselves “anti-woke”. Unless they’re successful in subverting its meaning to be “those we’ll put in concentration camps”. Oh wait, that still wouldn’t make you sane.
Yes I agree with your interpretation of what woke currently means. I’m saying that this is actually using woke ironically an insult. An unironic usage has no negative connotations.
The author James Lindsay has defined it in similar terms, as “a victimhood-based identity politics” whose “victim groups are whites, Christians, men, and straight people”. He argues that the movement is “roughly intersectional” insofar as it is obsessed with identity politics and a grievance relating to anti-white racism. “Like their counterparts on the Woke Left,” Lindsay writes, “the Woke Right have accepted as fact that there’s a conspiracy against people like them and that their only real hope is to lean into the identity grouping and advocate for collective power under that heading”. In these terms, the “woke right” is a kind of ideological doppelgänger, whose members exhibit the same precisionist and absolutist tendencies of their leftist counterparts.
Pierce Morgan uses it more and more often against right wingers to great effect.
Right. The right wingers are arguing (usually without knowing it because they don’t understand words) for people to stay asleep and not think or question
Woke means being aware that an interaction with a cop is a life or death situation. Cops aren’t your friends, they’re not here to protect you. They’re a threat, motivated by cruelty and love of power. When dealing with a cop, you have to speak gently, keep your hands visible at all times, and declare your intentions for every action. Or you could die. You could still die even if you do all that.
I think that ship has sailed. That word is at the moment a clear sign the person using it is an asshole. It can be reclaimed, but right now I don’t see that happening.
I would love to not let the nazis dictate how the swastika is used, but their perversion of the original meaning has permanently altered how it’s seen by the rest of the world. Claiming the moral high ground by trying to force something to mean what it no longer does is a pointless exercise.
It’s not about claiming the moral high ground, it’s just that you can’t have a word that can be used to mean its opposite, even if “sarcastically”. The word woke is just the past tense of wake, nothing else. It can be used to represent someone “waking up” from the hide-your-head-in-the-sand routine, or becomes able to see things from a new perspective. For the right, it doesn’t really mean anything, but they are pretty much using it as the new “sheeple”. Which doesn’t make any sense.
But the important thing is this: if someone is ridiculing people for wanting to be informed, involved in society, or generally just themselves, the only thing they’re actually insulting is their own intelligence and heart. If we let them have their use of woke as a generic mean insult, we lose sight of that.
More than swastikas, I think this case is closer to saying “you can use literally to mean figuratively because it’s common use” to which I also say no, fuck that.
But yes, swastikas forever symbolise Nazism. That doesn’t negate their original, positive meaning previously found in history, religion and culture. This is not an “achtually it’s ok to draw swastikas because they are actually good”. I’m just saying that context, and intent, matters. If you tattoo one on yourself as a westerner, you’re a Nazi - and it’s ok that everyone treats you like one. But should those original uses be stopped because it’s now “forever bad”?
Hey, anybody remember when MGS 2 came out, and the mass of NA gamers were raging about having to play as Raiden, because he was a … well in modern parlance, a beta cuck soyboy?
Kinda flew over all their heads that Raiden was basically a more realistic reflection of the NA target demo for MGS games, and oh he also goes through legitimate character development, gains maturity and confidence, oh well now, more lately, he’s basically a badass fucking cyberninja.
… Passing the torch off to Ciri fucking entirely makes sense within the world and lore of the Witcher series… and I thought we liked having an attractive gal booty to ogle at in third person?
Passing the torch off to Ciri fucking entirely makes sense within the world and lore of the Witcher serie
It’s also literally what happens in the books. Ciri grows as a person and becomes a badass swordswoman while Geralt eventually swears off taking monster contracts and later actually stops killing monsters. He even goes to donate his sword before getting pulled into one last battle to protect his friends and chosen family
gamesradar.com
Aktywne