Witcher 3 Developer Calls Skyrim "Casual"

[rasputin0009]

Mmm, clickbait article. Gaming news is really slow during the first couple months after E3.

So they try to confuse people into a really silly flame war.
Title: Casual vs. Hardcore!
Last paragraph of article: Not actually what he meant by "casual".

 

[-Dragmire-]

Depends on how you play it. I got game breaking mods in skyrim because I find the game most fun when I magic blast people into the skybox. Because the threat to me is quite a bit lower now, I could say I play it casually. Deadly dragons and other mods to make the game more difficult do the exact opposite.


Never played vanilla so I can't comment on that.

 

[Ickorus]

Skyrim is designed for the player to win and feel like a badass doing so, in that sense it is quite clearly designed in a way that caters to a more casual audience.

So yeah, he's right, but that's not to say it's bad or that it can't be played 'hardcore', just that it's designed for a more mainstream audience.

Spoiler: Kinda related.

 

[infinity_turtles]

I've just found out you either can't ignore staff members, or doing so doesn't hide their articles or threads. Annoying.

Yeah, if you couldn't tell I'm sure this article is just clickbait. Spends most of the article twisting what he said and then at the end acknowledges that he didn't mean it the way it was twisting things.

 

[Robetid]

I love how this forum went straight to how casual Skyrim is instead of what CDPR are doing with The Witcher 3.

So I guess OT:...

I am extremely excited with the idea behind The Witcher 3. I've loved the series so far and always wished there was more exploration in the world and if this is done well it is exactly what a lot of fans are looking for. It's rumored that this is the last chapter in Geralt's story so I'm hoping they keep the world alive and start letting the players create their own characters in it, which would make the series perfect in my opinion.

 

[Loonyyy]

This is poor journalistic form, misquoting and bastardising an interview for a cheap linkbaiting headline, with a paltry reconciliatory paragraph or so at the end to sum up a pointless conflict-driven narrative. Especially since it's obvious that the distinction between "Casual" and "Something that can be played casually" is one not usually acknowledged in gaming, where "Casual" typically refers to specific titles, of the likes of Farmville, or Bejewled.

The escapist can do better, and Andy Chalk especially, can do better.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Yeah, this article title is pure flame-baiting. What's next, Andy? Calling up David Gaider and telling him that CDPR didn't like his gay romances? Forging their signatures on a note to Chris Avellone saying that Planescape Torment sucked?

Yeah, this headline is really twisting the speaker's intent and is just quote mining. Yay journalism!

 

[Demagogue]

Witcher 3 Developer Calls Skyrim "Casual"

-SNIP-

Permalink

Reported... This article was written in a poor light for the sole purpose of getting page hits and views from being being outraged of someone calling Skyrim 'casual'. Since I can't flag the article itself, this is the next best thing I guess.


This isn't how you do news reporting Andy & The Escapist. Pathetic.

 

[mad825]

Well...Thinking about TW2, that was quite causal. Bonus points for adding QTEs...

At least Skyrim didn't go that far.

 

[piinyouri]

Mhm, he's right. I can jump into Skyrim whenever I want to, even after months of not playing, and I'll always know what to do, what I was doing, and I know I'll remember all the game systems and wont be at a disadvantage because I forgot how to parry/mix potions ect.
I love it.

I also really love The Witcher too.

 

[Bradmaster Flash]

The main problem I had with Skyrim is that although the world is VERY large, it just feels completely hollow. There's nothing to actually interact with. I can only personally enjoy it when it's enhanced with mods. The combat itself was spot on, if a little easy. The difficulty level is a prime example of artificial difficulty - nothing actually changes when you turn the difficulty up aside from health and damage values (no changes to the AI).

It IS a very accessible game though. Definitely more so than Oblivion or Morrowind. I'd never purchase it for retail price on a console, though. I think the modding potential is what makes all of Bethesda's games so brilliant.

 

[ninjaRiv]

Skyrim is casual as shit. It's not a bad game, it's one of the few games I've bought DLC for and I've put a lot of time in it. But there's not much to do, really. Not a lot of choices affect anything and you can complete all factions pretty easily so there's not much reason to replay, either. It's good has some great mechanics, but... It's casual. I don't think Witcher is super serious RPG, either but I think it's more like it than Skyrim and hopefully the third one will be even more so.

 

[Savber]

Escapist.

Stop.
Crapping out.
Awful.
Pointless.
Idiotic.
Sensationalist.
Titles.

You're not impressing anyone.

 

[DirtGreezer]

Well, then they should put their money, where their mouth is, eh?
I am quite exited.

 

[Krantos]

An RPG that non-reactive to the players actions cannot be considered a 'full-on, heavyweight RPG'.

Sorry, but that depends entirely on how you define RPG, and from what I've seen, no one can come up with a definition that satisfies everyone.

Some people think J-RPGs are the ones that Exemplify the Genre.

Some say games like Mass Effect are the Opitome of RPGs.

Others say games like The Witcher.

Others Dragon Age.

Still others, World of War Craft and the like.

Some, The Elder Scrolls.

I've seen each and every one of these called superior RPGs to the others, for various reasons.

I've even seen people argue that only Table Top games like D&D can "Truly" be RPGs.

RPG is such a nebulous term, claiming one game is more RPG than another is futile.

OT:
Not classy CD-Projekt. I like you guys, and I loved the Witcher. But it's never classy to diss your competition. Make a superior game and the people who play it will do that for you. Build yourself up too much and not only will you look like an ass, you'll set people's expectations of your own game unrealistically high.

 

[theultimateend]

While it's a stretch to call Skyrim casual and I like the game quite a bit (140 hours before I got bored) the game is very light on actual systems and reactivity. It's ultimately a hollow game where you may be the guy who is the leased of every guild and saved the world but nobody in said world will note that.

In that sense its getting creepishly close to the hollowness of real life for most people .

 

[OneSpiran]

While it's a stretch to call Skyrim casual and I like the game quite a bit (140 hours before I got bored) the game is very light on actual systems and reactivity. It's ultimately a hollow game where you may be the guy who is the leased of every guild and saved the world but nobody in said world will note that.

The new skill system is also considerably more pointless than the earlier games and the game can't be lost and it never pushes back towards the player. Nothing has consequences and nothing ultimately matters. You may be able to sneak stab a dragon in the tail and kill it with that one stab but some dude will still call you milk drinker.

Casual game it may not be, but a game that doesn't demand anything or indeed give anything, that it is.

This is possibly the most discrete way of expressing how I feel about Skyrim, it's just so.. Depressing? There's nothing to fill the 'Elder scrolls' niche and there's only so much Morrowind overhaul you can play, I'd like a game closer to what I enjoy, but there isn't one and I don't hold hope for the future installments.

 

[Farther than stars]

"We are heavily story driven and open world. This hasn't really been done before-"

Yeah, except for, you know, everything that Piranha Bytes has ever created or the 'Fable' games. Or don't those count because they're too colourful?

PS Morrowind did a great job at a rather story driven open world game

I think the criticism leveled against the Elder Scroll games is fair, because their stories aren't exactly straightforward, since you can play for pretty much hundreds of hours without even touching on the story. Or you can focus on the story and finish Morrowind in ten minutes. So to say that the Elder Scroll games are 'story driven' seems a little far fetched.
But what annoys me about this statement is that Mattson seems to think that his game is the first open-world RPG to be story driven, which is very ignorant of the entire history of RPGs. So, yes, he does seem to be getting ahead of himself.

 

[Trueflame]

Actually, "casual" is a great way to sum up Skyrim. It's not casual like the casual games you could play on your phone, or in the traditional gaming sense of the word, but it is certainly casual by comparison to previous Elder Scrolls games, continues the trend of games to become more streamlined and casual, and really fairly simplistic. You don't have to customize your character traits, any character can do anything, loot and enemies are still somewhat level based, and so on. Skyrim is heavyweight only because it's a major release and a landmark RPG game, not because of any intricacy or complexity within it. Pretty casual, and I respect CDProjektRed even more for saying that.

 

[In Search of Username]

Well, most people I know who play Skyrim don't play any other RPGs, I'll tell you that much. Hell I know a few people who play no other games but Skyrim. That's generally a sign that it's not something you need to be any good at gaming to get into. I wouldn't call it casual by gaming standards in general, that's reserved for Angry Birds as far as I'm concerned, but by RPG standards, hell yeah it's a casual game.