CD Projekt Red CEO Says Industry Execs Need to be More in Touch With Gamers

[Lizzy Finnegan]

CD Projekt Red CEO Says Industry Execs Need to be More in Touch With Gamers

"Games are all about passion, and if you're passionate together with your gamers then they'll all be back."

In their newest edition, Game Informer [http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2015/08/04/september-2015-the-taken-king-89056.aspx] sat down with CD Projekt Red CEO Marcin Iwinski and discussed the studio, DLC, and the future of the Witcher franchise. When asked what's next for Witcher, Iwinski said "It deserves some rest. The past 10 years the team has been working on swords and castles and medieval Slavic monsters, so I think it's time for some guns, androids, and some ammo. And a necropolis. So this is what we'll be working on."

Iwinski also said that the people who run companies need to be more in touch with their audience. "I don't want to be an industry oracle, but I have one simple dream for the people out there who run the companies: Just be more in touch with gamers."

"Games are all about passion, and if you're passionate together with your gamers then they'll all be back. But the fundamental question is who are [developers and publishers] developing and selling these games to and for? This is lost in translation quite often."

CD Projekt Red turned the heads of players and the industry alike with the release of Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt. Physical copies of the game were packed with a "Thank You" card, and the company announced at the time of its release that they would be rolling out 16 free DLC's, the last of which adds a player feedback [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/141768-CD-Projekt-RED-Announces-New-Game-Plus-Mode-For-Final-Free-Witcher-3-DLC].



Permalink

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Wait, game company CEOs should care what gamers like and actually make games to please them?!

That is literal madness. Truly the Dread God Azathoth has returned from the outer void to bring 10,000 years of Chaos! Decent PC ports, no more micro-transactions, Green light will actually be good, and gamers all across the universe will post in one voice that Remember Me was basically okay!
Chaos! Utter chaos!

 

[Pyrian]

"...I think it's time for some guns, androids, and some ammo. And a necropolis. So this is what we'll be working on." - Marcin Iwinski

And suddenly, I am already hyped. =D

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

"...I think it's time for some guns, androids, and some ammo. And a necropolis. So this is what we'll be working on." - Marcin Iwinski

And suddenly, I am already hyped. =D

Exactly what went through my mind! Now we just have to play the waiting game. And by that I mean send a couple of undercover ops in to extract the slightest mildew of rumour found growing amongst them. Can never have too much clickbait! (says the note that repeatedly appears on my desk).

 

[Erttheking]

I don't even like the Witcher that much and I want to buy Wild Hunt just because RED is the only AAA company saying these common sense things.

(Oh, that and apparently this one is much better)

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I don't even like the Witcher that much and I want to buy Wild Hunt just because RED is the only AAA company saying these common sense things.

(Oh, that and apparently this one is much better)

It's so much better that despite being a big fan of the previous games, I can't go back to them. Not just because of gameplay mechanics, but also because of Geralt himself. He's a pretty great protagonist now. One of the best in video games. And compared to Wild Hunt Geralt, Geralt in the first and second game is barely a character worth mentioning. What an incredible improvement.

 

[Rednog]

I hate to be the one...but I guess I have to. It's nice to say things like oh man Execs need to be more in touch with gamers...but has CD Projekt really been in touch with gamers?
We always see the oh man look at CD Projekt 16 FREE DLCS!...but is this really something to laud when they're pretty lackluster? In all seriousness we now know what all 16 of the DLCs are.
3 are simple skins for character in the game, pretty worthless.
1 is the "beard and hairstyle set" which I actually have to question as being legitimate DLC, considering it came out on launch and the whole hair/beard thing as part of the main quest in the introductory area. Don't get how this is some DLC when the mechanic is a part of the main story of the game.
2 armor sets which are pretty much worthless because they are insanely expensive and because the witcher sets are hands down better and upgradeable.
1 "Elite crossbow set" pretty much same as the two armor sets.
1 dlc to change the appearance of some cards in the cardgame.
Another dlc, more finishing moves, ho hum.
Now we come to the actual meat of the free DLC.
4 Quests, fairly short quest comparatively to some other quests in the game, don't get me wrong I did enjoy them.

But at the end of the day the "16 DLCs" really don't add up to much, if any company charged for this stuff I honestly wouldn't buy them for any more than $5, the quests are worth about that but the rest is just useless fluff.

And as for being in touch with gamers, I honestly appreciate the devs making tons of sweeping changes, but in my honest opinion a lot of the changes being made were because a lot of the systems in the game are a bit archaic. Having stuff like reagents and books all get cluttered up and accumulate weight with a messy crafting system is kind of appalling in any modern RPG.

Don't get me wrong I have 87 hours in Witcher 3, but I really think people are sucking off CD Projekt way too hard as some god sent heralds. It was a good game but don't be completely blind to poor design decisions and paper thin DLC that could've easily been part of the main game.

 

[Mikeybb]

Wait, game company CEOs should care what gamers like and actually make games to please them?!

That is literal madness. Truly the Dread God Azathoth has returned from the outer void to bring 10,000 years of Chaos! Decent PC ports, no more micro-transactions, Green light will actually be good, and gamers all across the universe will post in one voice that Remember Me was basically okay!
Chaos! Utter chaos!

Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes...
The dead rising from the grave!
Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together...
Mass hysteria!

*dlc related point snipped*

I think it was the point they were making.
The 16 free DLC were things that other companies have gleefully charged for, but that shouldn't be the case.

CDProjekt released these things for free because, to be honest, the content contained was of the type that would have been bundled as a 'thank you' to fans in the past.
All of this was prior to the age of 'monetize everything' where even the office cat would have a price tag stuck on its head if it fell asleep on the radiator.

As a single lump, CDProjekt could probably have put a price tag on the whole set and, especially with the new game plus content, made a decent amount of sales.
You are right in that the dlc, even bundled this way, isn't exactly the weightiest content but they did release it at a price point they believed it deserved.
Part of the tag you'd already paid for the main game.
Many other companies would have tagged a price onto these dlc even with the knowledge they'd only make a fraction of sales from their userbase.
I'm grateful to CDProjekt for the fact they didn't.

The whole 16 free dlc feels similar to the 'free weapons with a drink of water!' thing done by Techland for dying light in response to the Destiny 'drink red bull and power up' promotion.
A public, slightly cheeky way of showing where they think the line should be regarding dlc in what way it should be monetized (if at all).
The best part of it being, we got free stuff.

Side note.
I'm already excited to see what they do with Cyberpunk.

 

[Saetha]

I don't even like the Witcher that much and I want to buy Wild Hunt just because RED is the only AAA company saying these common sense things.

(Oh, that and apparently this one is much better)

Yeah, I gotta second Jensen here. I tried so hard to get into The Witcher 2 and it just wasn't grabbing me. (The only thing I really liked was Foltest and, whaddaya know, he immediately dies.) But so far I've barely begun TW3 and I'm already invested. I never got far enough in 2 to cite what, exactly, has been improved upon in it's sequel, but something definitely has.

 

[tzimize]

I don't even like the Witcher that much and I want to buy Wild Hunt just because RED is the only AAA company saying these common sense things.

(Oh, that and apparently this one is much better)

Yeah, I gotta second Jensen here. I tried so hard to get into The Witcher 2 and it just wasn't grabbing me. (The only thing I really liked was Foltest and, whaddaya know, he immediately dies.) But so far I've barely begun TW3 and I'm already invested. I never got far enough in 2 to cite what, exactly, has been improved upon in it's sequel, but something definitely has.

I just dont get that. I can understand people having trouble with Witcher 1. It was a REALLY heavy game to get into, probably taking at least 5-10 hours to get really interesting...but I stuck with it, and was rewarded with one of the best RPGs I've played, a lot thanks to brilliant choices and a STELLAR ending more satisfying than a mountain of chocolate.

Witcher 2 on the other hand...action from the get go, a living world, meaningful choices, shady characters...and after the big siege...an absolutely STUNNING village in the forest. I will grant you that the whole of Witcher 2 was not as polished, especially the 3rd act could have used some work...but it was ok to me.

Witcher 3 though...is just on a whole other level. I dont think I have EVER been as impressed with a game. The game world is HUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGE, and not in the empty, deserted way either. There are interesting stuff happening EVERYWHERE, and the cities...oh lord the cities...the biggest of them strikes JUST the right balance between being small enough to actually not be a hassle to move around, while at the same time being big enough to suggest scale. And the details...in EVERYTHING...from the trees, to the BEAUTIFUL armors and clothing...the monsters, the houses, the streets, the rivers, the sunsets...the boats on the water, the wind in the sails...I think I've played it for 20 odd hours for now, and I still get completely floored by the quality of it all.

How the hell they have managed it I honestly have no idea. It seems to be pure magic. The only problem is that they have set the bar impossibly high for any future projects.

I'm 34 years old now, and have been playing for over 20 years. Extensively. While Witcher 1 and 2 were great games to me...W3 is just...a Mona Lisa. I cant heave enough praise upon it

 

[Zetatrain]

I don't even like the Witcher that much and I want to buy Wild Hunt just because RED is the only AAA company saying these common sense things.

(Oh, that and apparently this one is much better)

Yeah, I gotta second Jensen here. I tried so hard to get into The Witcher 2 and it just wasn't grabbing me. (The only thing I really liked was Foltest and, whaddaya know, he immediately dies.) But so far I've barely begun TW3 and I'm already invested. I never got far enough in 2 to cite what, exactly, has been improved upon in it's sequel, but something definitely has.

I just dont get that. I can understand people having trouble with Witcher 1. It was a REALLY heavy game to get into, probably taking at least 5-10 hours to get really interesting...but I stuck with it, and was rewarded with one of the best RPGs I've played, a lot thanks to brilliant choices and a STELLAR ending more satisfying than a mountain of chocolate.

Bland voice acting and a some what outdated combat system. I don't know what you thought of the gameplay, but IMO the combat was a weird combination of real time and statistical combat. The one click sword combat was just too simple and got old fast, though grant I did like how I was an unstoppable killing machine by the end.

Now the writing for some of the characters was good, but unfortunately it gets dragged down by bland voice acting even in the enhanced edition.

In spite of this I eventually did get sucked into the game thanks to the game's lore and setting which are its strongest assets. Unfortunately it wasn't until Act 3 that I got sucked in, and it was a lot more than 10 hours (more like 20) before this happened.

I managed to slog through the prologue and Act 1, but once I got to Act 2 (Vizima) it felt like hitting a brick wall. I'm not quite sure what it was but something about that act just made the whole game feel like chore. This made me drop the game and every few months I would return to try and get through it only to drop it again after a couple hours. I started the game in 2013 and it wasn't until May of this year that I finally got past Act 2. If it wasn't for the Witcher 3 I probably would have still been stuck on Act 2.

In the end I'm glad I stuck with the Witcher 1, because I feel it made me appreciate the Witcher universe and, by extension, the Witcher 3 much more than if I hadn't completed it. Still, I find it hard to recommend the game to others because of how long it took me to complete it.

 

[tzimize]

I don't even like the Witcher that much and I want to buy Wild Hunt just because RED is the only AAA company saying these common sense things.

(Oh, that and apparently this one is much better)

Yeah, I gotta second Jensen here. I tried so hard to get into The Witcher 2 and it just wasn't grabbing me. (The only thing I really liked was Foltest and, whaddaya know, he immediately dies.) But so far I've barely begun TW3 and I'm already invested. I never got far enough in 2 to cite what, exactly, has been improved upon in it's sequel, but something definitely has.

I just dont get that. I can understand people having trouble with Witcher 1. It was a REALLY heavy game to get into, probably taking at least 5-10 hours to get really interesting...but I stuck with it, and was rewarded with one of the best RPGs I've played, a lot thanks to brilliant choices and a STELLAR ending more satisfying than a mountain of chocolate.

Bland voice acting and a some what outdated combat system. I don't know what you thought of the gameplay, but IMO the combat was a weird combination of real time and statistical combat. The one click sword combat was just too simple and got old fast, though grant I did like how I was an unstoppable killing machine by the end.

Now the writing for some of the characters was good, but unfortunately it gets dragged down by bland voice acting even in the enhanced edition.

In spite of this I eventually did get sucked into the game thanks to the game's lore and setting which are its strongest assets. Unfortunately it wasn't until Act 3 that I got sucked in, and it was a lot more than 10 hours (more like 20) before this happened.

I managed to slog through the prologue and Act 1, but once I got to Act 2 (Vizima) it felt like hitting a brick wall. I'm not quite sure what it was but something about that act just made the whole game feel like chore. This made me drop the game and every few months I would return to try and get through it only to drop it again after a couple hours. I started the game in 2013 and it wasn't until May of this year that I finally got past Act 2. If it wasn't for the Witcher 3 I probably would have still been stuck on Act 2.

In the end I'm glad I stuck with the Witcher 1, because I feel it made me appreciate the Witcher universe and, by extension, the Witcher 3 much more than if I hadn't completed it. Still, I find it hard to recommend the game to others because of how long it took me to complete it.

Oh I agree, the combat system in Witcher 1 was pretty awful. The voice acting I cant really remember. It didnt strike me as either here nor there. The setting and lore is what interested me the most as well. To me, the game started picking up when I was finished with the village (act 1 I guess), and saw the consequences of some of my choices. It wet my appetite for more

 

[Xannieros]

Had to chime in. If this were EA or another big company we would see it like this.

I hate to be the one...but I guess I have to. It's nice to say things like oh man Execs need to be more in touch with gamers...but has CD Projekt really been in touch with gamers?
We always see the oh man look at CD Projekt 16 FREE DLCS!...but is this really something to laud when they're pretty lackluster? In all seriousness we now know what all 16 of the DLCs are.

3 are simple skins for character in the game, pretty worthless.

$4.99 Skin bundle.

1 is the "beard and hairstyle set" which I actually have to question as being legitimate DLC, considering it came out on launch and the whole hair/beard thing as part of the main quest in the introductory area. Don't get how this is some DLC when the mechanic is a part of the main story of the game.

Probably free, cant argue.

2 armor sets which are pretty much worthless because they are insanely expensive and because the witcher sets are hands down better and upgradeable.
1 "Elite crossbow set" pretty much same as the two armor sets

Pre-Order Bonus. Paid DLC after.

1 dlc to change the appearance of some cards in the cardgame.
Another dlc, more finishing moves, ho hum.

Possibly free or $1.99 for skins.

Now we come to the actual meat of the free DLC.
4 Quests, fairly short quest comparatively to some other quests in the game, don't get me wrong I did enjoy them.

Possibly $4.99 each or $15.99 bundle.

We rarely see "Free DLC" for anything these days. Even if they're small and slightly meaningless to the game other companies would charge.

 

[Mugiwara]

Not that I dislike CD nor do I disagree with them. I miss the time where things like a costume didn't need a dlc or micro transactions though. I loved my Panda Suit in Onimusha since I had earned it for example.

CD took a modern day approach to that for the most part and didn't hassle you for 3 dollars. That is fantastic, in some ways games need to go back to letting players earn rewards. I mean in Witcher 3 I can usually grab the guarded treasure, at level 4 I figured this out. I was looting things from the chests guarded by wyverns and Lychens, Lashens??? Weird skull faced wood creatures I think, all with ??? Levels. On death march no less.

Where is the silly costume for completing the story fast or that cool weapon for doing everything?
I am being rewarded for cowardice and taking advantage of a wandering creatures wandering code.

I like free stuff too, dislike paying but enjoy a decent reward. When I play Dark Souls I feel rewarded. That too has the run and press a to loot effect to it to though.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

It's pretty touching to read this. They are a pretty great company. If I were to offer one bit of constructive criticism, though, it's to have a playable female lead (at least as an option) that you can play as from start to finish in a world comparable to the male lead's. It wasn't the case with Witcher 3.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

"...I think it's time for some guns, androids, and some ammo. And a necropolis. So this is what we'll be working on." - Marcin Iwinski

And suddenly, I am already hyped. =D

They have a video promo of their cyberpunk game they are working on; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7_ZTI1OwCk

 

[Saetha]

Snipperoo

Ehh, your mile may vary on that. I feel like the prologue siege to Witcher 2 wasn't all that impressive to begin with, and after Foltest died and the game "opened up," it just lost all momentum for me. The combat was a chore, and the story and the world (Or what I saw of it, at least) wasn't enough to make up for it. I had to keep from groaning every time I picked up the controller.

TW3 is so much better in this regard. Combat's actually bearable, Geralt's fantastically snarky, and the world's great to explore.

 

[Silence]

CD Project, healing the industry one step at a time ... I actually think they are one of the most important game studios right now. Witcher 3 was a more important game than just being really really good (which it is).