Waving pubic hair?
I'd definitely buy a new PC for that kind of technology! :P

May I ask: why? If the game has a different world, characters and story, why do you think calling it Witcher 4 would make it any better than if it was called The Adventures in Timbucto?

I'm honestly curious about this. While I can understand why some people would want a series to continue on and on and on and on so they get more adventures of the favourite protagonist, or more games in the setting, or more of the game's mechanic, I can't for the life of me understand why people (and I've met surprisingly many players like this) would want to see Game (n+1) even if it's totally different. Is it a magical name? Will it somehow cause the same developers to make a better product just because it has the same name as a previous one?

I can understand why the developer/publisher would do it: giving the game a name of a well known franchise will cause more people to buy it, even if it's completely unrelated. But why the players want it is completely beyond me.
Ditto.

Arena 1994
Daggerfall 1996
Morrowind 2002
Oblivion 2006
Skyrim 2011

its now 2016 and there is no new Elderscrolls which brings in twice the profit and comes from a larger team... if anything this is due to release, but look at the numbers, look at the time for Zenimax and there releases. it keeps getting longer :/

The Witcher 2007
The Witcher II 2011
The Witcher III 2015

So at minimum its 2019, but this wont be, they are taking on Cyberpunk 2077 and releasing 2 expansions which are as large as the main game in content... you are getting more Witcher in the form on Expansion Packs.

The Witcher games are a very successful series, and with fantasy you can always continue the story even if you were to kill off all of the main characters and destroy the universe. A sequel would simply do some weird science or magic and create a new universe, or perhaps use a parallel universe, time travel or other fantasy sauce. Another option is to go the prequel route for example. So in terms of story, it's always possible to make a sequel including for The Witcher. In terms of technology, they proved with TW3 that they know their technology so that's not a problem. Market? TW3 outsold anything they've ever done before and was a gigantic success. There is no evidence available that they couldn't do another Witcher game and make it even bigger and even more popular as all of the evidence we have shows that each time they have made a sequel to the game in the past it has resulted in it being bigger, and better so while there is no guarantee they'll ever make another sequel, and there's no guarantee it would be awesome if they did, based on past performance it's reasonable to believe that they would only do even better if they were to make another Witcher sequel.

Obviously they're totally busy with Cyberpunk 2077 right now so they're not likely going to be doing 2 projects at the same time including a Witcher 4. But even if they do do another sequel, I doubt they're likely to start blathering any major details about it either because that builds up expectations and gets the Internet rumour and hate machine rolling full steam ahead. The best thing they could do in terms of The Witcher 4 is simply never talk about it until if and when they make it, and only then talk about it when it has been in development for 1-2 years or more. I suspect if it happens, it'll be 2018 or 2019 before we ever hear about it though. That's totally fine by me. :)

Why should they? In 4 years, Witcher 3 won't need a brand new PC to run.

See, another example of what I've written about above. Why would you want a game with none of the characters and a completely different universe to be called Witcher 4?

Announcement: "CDPR is working on a game: the Hero of Fire. It will be set on a mystical land called Erba".
Reaction: Noooo. I wish they'd make Witcher 4 instead.

Announcement: "CDPR is working on the Witcher 4. The game will be a reboot of the story arc. It will be set on a mystical land called Erba in a parallel universe and take place 200 years after the events of the Witcher 3 with a new protagonist".
Reaction: Hooray! Finally the sequel is here.

Why? It's the same friking game.

Maybe they should do a Leisure Suit Larry, and go directly to The Witcher 5.

Well, more importantly, Witcher is a licensed work - I don't think license would even allow attaching Witcher to something entirely different.

Games aren't just a story - creating a sequel in a different universe, but with similar mechanics and themes will give players the 'right' expectations. See Final Fantasy games or, heck, Heroes of Might and Magic 5 (4 too to some extent, you could argue that these expectations harmed the game more than they helped it tho)

I know. I just gave the story as an example, and was actually going to give the example of HoMM5 where the story is completely new, but the game mechanic is what's continuous.

Take Portal as another example, Portal 3 could be a game with completely new mechanics (say more of an action platformer than puzzle solving) that continues the story (of Chell, Glados, Wheatly, cakes and whatnot) or a game with a completely new unrelated story that uses the portal mechanism (and possibly expand on it, like the paints used in Portal 2). And while I think both would be terrible ideas, I can understand how some people might like them: there is some continuity. And if a person loved the first 2 games for the puzzles, he might find the second idea appealing, even if the story is gone.

Yet quite a few number of people want to see a sequel "in any capacity". They're willing to see Baldur's Gate 3 with an unrelated sotry, in a completely different part of Faerun, using newer AD&D rules and in a 3D engine instead of the dated Infinity. Heck, even by a new developer and publisher. They'll still be happy that "finally they're making a sequel" even if the only thing it'd have in common is the name.

Agreed 100%
I love the Witcher series and there is still going to be the blood&wine expansion to play,i feel every single game in the trilogy had a different personality and they all came together to form a great story(at least for me)but i don't want it to become diluted with multiple games released in a reduced timeframe.This ain't assassin's creed(for a second,while typing this,i had the image of geralt climbing a tower *shudders*)

Ha, who wouldn't?! ;D

Just wait until you see the character creation screen.

It will be the most glorious moment in video game history!

I never stated that I wanted a game with none of the same characters in a completely different universe. I stated that no matter what the end of a fictional story is, that a sequel is always possible. The purpose of saying that was that some people think that The Witcher series is 100% completely over and that a sequel is not even possible. I'm saying that sequels are _always_ possible in science-fiction fantasy.

That does not in any way say that I want or wish to see a random sequel discard the existing story and warp to some parallel universe where everything is different. Rather it says that there are infinite numbers of possibilities for continuing a franchise including continuing the story from where it left off, or a prequel from where things began, or some other middle story that we don't know the details of yet, or even a side story. Any of these are options that could be pursued, and any of them could be very good, or they could be bad.

I think that CDPR has proven their ability to create an amazing franchise and don't see any reason why they could not produce additional games in the series with a compelling story and characters, whether they include some or all of the characters we know and love or otherwise. If they do make another game in the series, whatever approach they take I feel pretty confident that they would rather do something tasteful and worthy of the franchise name and of their fanbase than to just whip up some random crap, throw the name on it and try to cash in on it. CDPR have shown that they themselves are die hard gamers that care about their games and their customers, so if they do a Witcher 4 sequel/prequel/whateverquel, I for one will be excited as shit if and when they announce it, and I wont have even the slightest fear of them doing something stupid with it because they've not done a single thing in the past for me to personally mistrust their judgment.

I will however say one more thing, which is that the more popular a game company becomes or a game franchise, the more difficult it is for the company to make additional sequels because a subset of their customer base gets attached to the game(s) with a religious like zeal almost like a cult, ready to burn buildings down if a pixel is not the right colour, or a blade of grass in the game is turned the wrong way. This makes game companies afraid to even consider doing additional sequels in a given franchise because they end up feeling like they could never please their fan base entirely and anything they could try to do, someone will tear it apart and give them a black eye for it. So they often just throw in the towel, maybe without even officially declaring they're doing so. Half-life 3 and Portal 3 seem to be among the casualties of this phenomenon IMHO.

In my way of thinking though, if a game company has consistently put out consecutive titles in a franchise where each game is better than the previous ones, there is no reason why they should stop doing so if they enjoy creating the games in the series and their fans continue to enjoy them. As long as their hearts are in the right place and they have passion for what they're doing and are not constrained by their publisher owning creative control or other industry nonsense, then I support their continued pursuit of this art form.


Except they've not announced that they're doing that.

One thing is true though, is that there are enough negative dysfunctional people out there in the world of gaming that any existing or new game company could literally announce any new game project at any time and they will universally be met with both positive and negative comments from the peanut gallery no matter what it is. If game companies never released any games because some person on the Internet didn't like the idea, then there would be a complete total dead stop in game production beyond which no video games would ever be produced.

You can see that psychology play out right here in the GOG forums every single day too. Some positive announcement comes out from GOG about a new website feature, or a new Galaxy feature, or a new game release announcement or just about anything. Immediately you'll see some people very happy about the new announcement, and you'll also see people upset or angry about it. It goes something like this:

Announcement: New game release: Star Wars 5 Deluxe Gold Darth Vader Edition!

Inevitable negative bitching: "Yeah, who gives a crap. Wake me up when you get Star Wars 6 Supreme Edition with the Kung-Fu Grip, this is lame ass.", "Yeah, that's nice and all but this version doesn't have the original 8" floppy disk release of the game with CGA graphics so that blows. Disney sucks, and GOG I'm very disappointed.", "You got this game and didn't bother to scan the manual for it and you expect me to pay $4 for it?"

I could go on and on with hypothetical examples like this for days, or even just search the forums and copy and paste links a mile long to reactions like this on every single announcement ever made. It is a sad fact, but the amount of entitlement mentality amongst the gaming community as a whole is massive, and it presents an impenetrable barrier that no game company can ever produce anything ever without receiving a negative piece of entitlement mentality like this in return from some fraction of the gaming community. Just a fact of life.

The point of mentioning this, is that game companies need to both have and pursue their own passions as gamers and developers themselves, both using their own desires and experience as input as well as both positive and negative feedback from their existing fans as well as other potential customers, but they need to move forward with what they think are good ideas that will be received well by as large a portion of the market as possible without expecting everyone to like it or receive it well.

Someone once said something along the lines of... You can please some of the people all of the time, and you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time, and if you try to do so you'll end up pleasing nobody.

Interesting reaction, except they haven't announced that they're doing that, so you're having a highly charged negative reaction to speculation over a hypothetical game scenario that you created yourself which doesn't actually exist. Why would you want to waste time getting upset about something that doesn't exist and which there is no indication of which is likely to exist?

This is why game companies rarely ever talk about what they are working on privately. Because people take words out of context, and in lieu of detailed information about what is actually happening, people's minds create fantasy scenarios of doomsday things they think must be happening, then react negatively to them and get ready to form lynch mobs to go burn the witch that doesn't actually exist.

"If they do ABCD, then I'll be pissed!" becomes "THEY ARE DOING ABCD, SO I AM PISSED!", which makes no sense unless it has been officially announced that they are actually doing ABCD, and ABCD actually does sound like a bad idea.

Is it possible for CDPR to continue The Witcher series? Absolutely. Is it possible that they could continue it tastefully in some way and make an awesome game that everyone enjoys? Absolutely. Are they going to? Nobody outside of CDPR truly knows the answer to that at all. So what is to be gained by fearing a sequel, or fearing their ability to produce something worthy of being a sequel when they've done nothing so far other than demonstrating that they have an incredible ability to make fantastic sequels?

It's like people automatically assume the more successful someone is, the more likely they are to fail next time or something because "you can only climb so high, so you might as well not bother because fear fear fear, tremble, shudder".

I'm setting aside $50 CAD right now for The Witcher 4 sight unseen, whether they ever make the game or not because I trust CDPR and believe if they make the game it will kick my ass with awesomeness. A negative thought about this theoretical game wont even enter my mind until it is produced, released, I own it, it is installed on my hard disk and I've played it. Then and only then will I potentially worry about whether the concept of the game was a good idea or bad idea.

I think CDPR should take a break from the witcher series for a bit, do some other games then come back to the witcher.

Exactly. I'm not contemplating the next meal when the trouser buttons have popped and dessert is about to arrive.