[DoctorEldritch]

Hello Legion Gamers!

Remember the first witcher game as it came out back in 2007 (yikes!)? Want to play it again?

If so, then here may be a piece of good news for you: Rivia's best monster hunter is getting some work done as the remake of the game is underway!



This is one of those purely cosmetic remakes, though: no quests or story will change. The Fool's Theory studio is responsible for the remake and will adapt the game for Unreal Engine 5, with CD Projekt only keeping an eye on the whole thing.

How does that sound, will you play it? 2007 is a long time ago, and it was not a bad game, but Witcher 3 still holds its position as one of the best RPGs of all time. It may be interesting for new gamers to try the now-outdated first game, but would it attract those who already played it back in 2007?

I played it back then, but I am honestly not sure if I would play it again, especially with proper Witcher 4 on the horizon.

What about you, anyone interest in an old game with a new graphic?

[Saka]

As someone who played the original game back then (not at launch, but a year after due to hardware requirements), I wouldn't mind giving it a replay if the remake fixes how clunky the controls were. It was a very good game overall, the mood was more specific to Witcher from the books compared to the later games.

[DoctorEldritch]

@Saka True, but game one is the first in a trilogy, which itself is a continuation of the story, picking up where the books left off. So if I replay it, I'd need to play the other two as well, and I remember most of what has happened there, so it would not be as interesting. Playing just for the sake of new graphics if I've played the game before is not bad, but I have many other games on my list that I have not played, so Witcher Remake would be a very low priority.

But I generally have this problem, with replayability, I could never understand why people would play games several times (unless games were designed for that), I mean, you know everything that will happen. And with Witcher 3, for example, you can resolve things differently, yes, but I got the best possible outcomes in my first playthrough, I would not want to play as a "bad witcher", not with this character.

This is one of the reasons why I could not play Yakuza 4 for about a year after I got my saves deleted halfway through, it was just boring to grind through the story I already knew, had to forget some. But recently a discussion with @ZaidH inspired me to get back to it, so I am playing it again now.

But the replayability of games and wether people play games they played before or not is an interesting topic, maybe it deserved a separate thread even.

[Saka]

@DoctorEldritch I think the choices were less morally defined in the first game and there was no "bad ending" as such. There were pros and cons to each faction, as well as the neutrality. The last game was quite a bit different in this regard, where everything could just go wrong if you made the wrong choices.

My SO managed to get a complete disaster on his first Witcher 3 playthrough. 🤣

[DoctorEldritch]

@Saka Wait, what factions? Did Witcher have factions? I remember The Assassins of Kings having factions, and you need to play it twice for the whole story, but the first game, I think, mainly has local decisions. Sure, you can side with some groups here and there, but I do not think it is as major as "factions"?

I was very careful with my Witcher 3, got all endings that I wanted. Ended up in a Toussaint villa with Yennefer and a stuffed unicorn. 🦄

[Saka]

@DoctorEldritch There is a point in the game, past which depending on who you side with, you will have very restricted interactions with either the Nonhumans or the Order of the Flaming Rose.

[DoctorEldritch]

@Saka Oh yeah, there was that. I guess that counts as factions, you're right.