Witcher 3 Developer Calls Skyrim "Casual"

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Yeah, I guess in comparison too RPGs such as The Witcher and Dark Souls it is pretty casual.
Although I would argue that that isn't actually a bad thing, since those games are made too appeal to a very specific niche and Skyrim and The Elder Scrolls have always been about a slightly more widespread audience including the majority of fantasy lovers, and not just people with inhuman tolerance for frustration.

Professor Uzzy:

Andy Chalk:
When you think about The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, you probably don't think "casual." With its massive open world, competing factions, huge array of NPCs, widely varied environments, hundreds of dungeons and deep, flexible character creation options, Skyrim is by most measures a full-on, heavyweight RPG.

image

An RPG that non-reactive to the players actions cannot be considered a 'full-on, heavyweight RPG'. The mechanics are shallow, the world lifeless and cold. Nothing you do is of any consequence in the game world.

Now it's certainly a fun game, and I've put a lot of hours into it, but calling it a heavyweight RPG is just silly. Jonas Mattson is entirely correct in his assessment.

I think he is meaning compared to other well known games. And there is truth in that matter after all with you ask an average joe about Skyrim they think a big massive rpg. Well ask the common gamer you get well what this guy is and most other posters have said.

Now then, would more people do more rpgs in space and sci-fi setting, ya old medieval ages gets dull after so many many many tries don't it?

Andy Chalk:
Developer Calls Skyrim "Casual"

Andy Chalk:
Unless you work at CD Projekt Red, that is, where they apparently think that it's a fun way to pass some time in between rounds of Bejeweled.

Dude not freaking cool. The quote doesn't even put Skyrim in the same vein as Bejeweled.

Andy Chalk:
"I am a fan of Skyim, a lot of us love Skyim. But while they are doing their thing, like open world, jumping and playing around quite casually, we are doing it a little bit differently," Mattson told Gameranx. "We are heavily story driven and open world. This hasn't really been done before and we want to prove that it can be done."

It doesn't even badmouth Skyrim as "casual" as you are insinuating, it's pointing out how it's less story-driven and more "player-doing-stupid-shit-driven"

You even say:

Andy Chalk:
In all fairness, I don't think Mattson is actually suggesting that Skyrim is a "casual game"

I mean Jesus I know Escapist does plenty of link-baiting from time to time, but this is just trying to start a flamewar.

I would say Skyrim is pretty casual. Its interface is limited and interaction with the world is entirely minimal. You can't accidentally make the game harder for yourself, you acquire new equipment pretty easily as you level up - at no point did I ever struggle to find a new weapon, and I'm pretty sure I skipped a few weapon stages things moved that quickly. Then I wandered about with my soul-eating Dragonbone swords the Corsairs until the Solstheim DLC, and then I just switched them out for the...oh god I don't remember what the material is called - but I have the whole suit of armour of it too.

What I'm trying to say is that the game really does just press gifts into your hands every time you do something. I never felt challenged or that I could do something wrong...or even that I was in a living, breathing world. It felt flat and empty and developing my character did not seem as worthwhile as in Oblivion - as soon as the werewolf perk tree became available, I completed it in one transformation. It was quite the blitz, admittedly, and I admit it was fun, but I still feel like I haven't developed at all.

Also what's with the bitchy headline? Did you want us to start calling the developer names? Maybe we could sleep with their boyfriend in revenge.

Pink Gregory:
Considering the actual quote from CDPR, that's kinda been twisted into an inflammatory title...

I agree. What's the point of this article? Incite people into arguing about it? He was referring to the free-roaming nature of Skyrim, as opposed to the more story-based nature of the Witcher series.

Andy, you should be ashamed.

Flame-baiting title, sees the article does not exactly match said flame-baiting title, confirms theory it is from Andy Chalk.

Happens far too often, nothing to see here people.

Escapist needs some oversight if they are going to keep putting these things on the homepage.

As Totalbiscuit have been saying Skyrim in an Ocean thats only knee deep.

It does feel more casual. Though its casual for hardcore gamers lol.

Sorry, but I would rather take Skyrim's "casual" approach than Second Witcher's supposed complexity. Almost half of the in-game time was spent in dialogues. I want to play the game, not listen to it.

Charli:

I never said what I mean is what other people should mean

And I never said that's what you said, either. How convenient.

Charli:

I understood you fine

If you understood me fine, then you lied when you tried to portray my argument. Do you really want to be admitting that you're lying in order to drum up an argument?

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".

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

BloodSquirrel:
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!

Andy Chalk:
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.

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

At least Skyrim didn't go that far.

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.

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.

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.

Escapist.

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

You're not impressing anyone.

teh_gunslinger:
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.

haha you just pretty much defined a casual game to me with how you described skyrim.

i love the game, but even ill be the first to admit they spread the depth and immersion on thinly.you only have to wander around a city for 5 minutes and you can see the game mechanics shining through the thin facade they have on top which is never a good sign.

it always got me that they added things like an extensive crafting system yet actually making your own spells was removed.

as for the mention that they are using a russel crow movie for inspiration, well thats nothing really to brag about haha

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

Professor Uzzy:

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.

teh_gunslinger:
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 :o.

teh_gunslinger:
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.

Andy Chalk:
"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?

spartandude:
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.

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.

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.

They're taking inspiration from that godawful Robin Hood movie? Really?

I look forward to the part where Geralt is saved by an army of little masked children riding ponies.

Skyrim is like a giant ballpit. The Witcher is more like an adventure playground. I can definitely see where he is coming from.

Gee? You think maybe ol' Jonas might be baiting us in order to start a conversation that equates his game with Bethesda's long running gazillion dollar franchise? This is cheesy marketing. Nothing more. I really had hoped that we, the gaming community, had learned to recognize this sort of crap and ignore it by now?

Hmmm, slightly sensationalist headline there.

I was gonna come into the thread at be all "Probably not a great idea to slag off many people's favourite game for no apparent reason. Why would you even do that?". But he didn't, really.

There are many ways in which Skyrim is reaching towards casual. For a large scale RPG you don't get much more accessible than Skyrim. Which is a point in its favour, mostly. Especially on its lower difficulty settings, where combat essentially becomes 'stand in front of enemies and mash Left Mouse Button'. But whatever.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here