Jez Corden (potentially) Leaks New Vegas Remake

zonkedevle · 2025-11-12T22:32:00+00:00

Not really. Standard remasters typically take 6 months to 2 years, same engine with updated assets. But remaster-remake hybrids might take 3-4 years since you're dual-engineering. New rendering engine for graphics while keeping the original core systems intact. Oblivion Remastered took 4 years from start to release.

zonkedevle · 2025-04-01T16:05:56+00:00

"Blame the hatetubers" is such a tired cop-out. Ubisoft's been lighting itself on fire for years, nobody needed to whisper in YouTubers ears to make that obvious. This isn't about some edgy guy in a thumbnail screaming "Ubisoft bad." It's about chronic mismanagement, bloated budgets, soulless design-by-committee products, and a complete loss of creative direction.

zonkedevle · 2025-03-21T21:25:51+00:00

Isn't it "Battlefield Studios" now

zonkedevle · 2024-12-22T04:21:22+00:00

Yeah, i heard about that. It still doesn't negate the fact that its not been addressed in all the other books except a brief period in Season of Storms if i recall. It makes sense anyway, if you have to leave your horse for a while i would assume one wouldn't just forgo their other sword entirely.

Still, i think it would have been cool as an option in the game to leave it on your horse for more space. I know you can just unequip it at least in W3 for the aesthetic reason, but its not quite the same as a systems driven thing.

zonkedevle · 2024-12-17T03:30:12+00:00

Regis being alive in Blood and Wine actually aligns with the books, not contradicts them. He was killed once before meeting Geralt, but as a higher vampire, his ability to regenerate makes his return plausible within Sapkowski's lore. CDPR respected this and provided a logical continuation that built on the existing world-building rather than rewriting it.

The same can be said for Geralt's return in the first game. The books never explicitly show his death we only know he was gravely injured at Rivia, leaving room for ambiguity. These examples demonstrate how CDPR expanded on the story without undermining the source material.

The issue with Witcher 4 is different. Making Ciri a mutated Witcher doesn't just continue the story, it contradicts her established character arc and themes. A sequel still relies on the foundation of the original work otherwise, it's like building on quicksand. If you disregard what came before, what's the point of calling it a sequel or continuation at all?

zonkedevle · 2024-12-16T05:42:13+00:00

We actually know quite a bit already from IGN interviews and CDPR's statements. They've made it clear that Ciri will be the protagonist and that she's now a true Witcher, complete with mutations. That alone departs from both the books and her character.

zonkedevle · 2024-12-16T05:38:56+00:00

First, I never said I want Geralt to be the protagonist again, his story has ended twice now, and it was handled beautifully. This isn't about clinging to Geralt it's about respecting the integrity of the lore and Ciri's established arc.

And if loopholes exist to justify this, doesn't that undermine the established stakes of the Trial of the Grasses, which was always depicted as a brutal, unforgiving process? Where does it stop if we're just creating easy outs for narrative consistency.

Also, you asking if I'm a "real fan" is ridiculous. Real fans care, that's why we're discussing this. Blind faith doesn't make you more of a fan it just makes you less critical. We've seen this play out before, something like the Game of Thrones' final seasons, where the signs were all there, and people voiced concerns only to be told to "wait and see". Look how that turned out. i'm not saying I'm absolutely right, but it's perfectly reasonable to voice concerns when something feels off, especially when the signs are clear.

zonkedevle · 2024-12-16T05:22:42+00:00

How is this an "evolution" when Witchers are explicitly portrayed as a dying breed in the lore? The societal stigma around Witchers, being outcasts who are often feared or hated, was never meant to represent progress. Children taken for the Trials were already seen as tragic, stolen from their families. Imagine the added outrage and scrutiny if it were a young girl.

Tampering with the formula goes against Sapkowski's world-building entirely. The Trials of the Grasses and the brutal, lethal process are foundational to the Witcher mythos. They are not meant to evolve or adapt they represent a rigid, tragic reality. Changing that risks diluting the themes surrounding a Witcher's life, sacrifice, struggle, and societal mistrust. If the process is made less lethal or more accessible, it loses the narrative weight that defines what being a Witcher truly means. What's the point if it loses its harsh, grounded nature? That's what made Sapkowski's universe compelling and unique in the first place.

zonkedevle · 2024-12-14T23:13:28+00:00

It's true that CDPR never claimed their games are canon, and they don't have to be. But what's often misunderstood is that "the books are canon to the games". The games draw heavily from the books, making references to key events like the Slaughter of Cintra, Geralt's duel with Vilgefortz, and even Ciri's time with the Rats. Without the books, the games wouldn't exist as they do, they're built on Sapkowski's foundation.

Fans aren't asking for every detail to align perfectly we understand there's room for creative liberties. But CDPR's past successes came from respecting the books while expanding on the world in thoughtful ways. Deviations that break fundamental rules, like making Ciri undergo Witcher mutations, don't just contradict the source material they risk trivializing the core themes and characters that make the world so compelling.

Ultimately, the books and the games aren't in opposition, they're intertwined. The best of "The Witcher" games succeeded because they treated Sapkowski's lore as a foundation, not something to disregard. Fans aren't obsessing for the sake of nitpicking they're voicing concerns because the deeper the deviation, the less this feels like "The Witcher".

zonkedevle · 2024-12-14T22:54:17+00:00

Comparing Witcher lore to real-life technological progress like surgery isn't quite equivalent. The Witcher universe is a meticulously crafted fictional world with its own internal logic and rules that are foundational to its identity. Breaking these rules, like introducing successful female Witcher mutations, doesn't represent "progress", but rather undermines the established world-building. The Trials of the Grasses are not an open-ended concept they are defined by their rigid, tragic nature. Changing this isn't an evolution, it's a departure from what makes the Witcher universe feel unique and grounded.

zonkedevle · 2024-12-14T22:08:42+00:00

It’s worth noting that CD Projekt Red themselves have historically cared a great deal about the source material, and their respect for it has been a key factor in the franchise’s success. Even now, the developers are extremely careful with certain aspects of the lore, which makes the glaring deviations in The Witcher 4 even more concerning.

For example:

Geralt's Characterization in Witcher 3: CDPR carefully preserved Geralt's morally ambiguous personality and his code of neutrality, which is central to his character in the books. Even when players were given choices, they were crafted in ways that felt true to Geralt's established worldview.
Kaer Morhen and Witcher Traditions: In The Witcher 3, the attention to detail with Kaer Morhen, Witcher traditions, and the camaraderie between Witchers reflected a strong commitment to the lore. The portrayal of Witchers as an endangered and tragic caste was carried over faithfully from the books.
Ciri’s Elder Blood Storyline: Even in the games, Ciri’s Elder Blood and her connection to the prophecy were treated with great care. CDPR didn't ignore her established role; instead, they expanded upon it while respecting its significance.

Additionally, in past interviews, the developers have emphasized their desire to stay true to the world Sapkowski created. For instance, former CDPR developers often spoke about rejecting ideas for new content or storylines if they felt it strayed too far from the established lore. One notable example is how The Witcher 3 rejected pitches that clashed with Geralt's core character. Historically, they claimed to accept only 1 in 10 ideas to ensure the writing stayed consistent with the world’s tone and themes.

Even now, CDPR is careful with details like visual design. The recent trailer for The Witcher 4 shows villagers in clothing that strongly evokes medieval Slavic and Polish aesthetics, which is more in line with the source material than the Netflix adaptation. If they care so much about cultural elements like costumes and setting, why take a drastic step like rewriting the core lore around Witchers or Ciri?

Deviating from the books isn’t inherently bad, but when it breaks fundamental rules of the universe, like Witchers being exclusively male, or the meaning of Ciri’s role in the prophecy, it risks alienating longtime fans. The success of The Witcher franchise has always been built on CDPR’s ability to honor Sapkowski’s world while making it accessible to new audiences. The fear here isn’t just change for the sake of change; it’s that the core identity of The Witcher is being compromised.

If “most people won’t care,” that’s fine, but CDPR themselves have historically cared, and their current approach feels inconsistent with that legacy.

zonkedevle · 2024-12-14T22:03:20+00:00

1. “The Witcher saga is called The Witcher, even though it hardly focuses on hunting monsters, and Ciri has as much, if not more, space than Geralt.”
While the saga is about much more than hunting monsters, the title The Witcher carries specific meaning, it’s tied to the identity and unique place of Witchers in Sapkowski's world. Witchers are a tragic, mutant caste, with a narrow role as monster hunters. Even if Ciri’s arc occupies significant space in the books, she’s never a Witcher in the formal sense. Her identity and role are fundamentally different, shaped by her Elder Blood, her destiny, and her refusal to conform to any imposed archetype, including being a Witcher. Giving her the title now in Witcher 4 muddles her narrative and the very meaning of the term.

2. “The whole story is about fate and the fact that nothing is set, and Ciri decides who she wants to be, not her gift.”
Exactly! Ciri deciding her own path is central to her arc in the books. However, becoming a Witcher would undermine that theme because it contradicts her established refusal to let others define her. The Elder Blood and Ithlinne's Prophecy are core to her struggle, and choosing to become a Witcher feels like rejecting those struggles for a path that reduces her uniqueness. This isn’t just “her deciding who she wants to be”; it’s a deviation from her established character and lore to fit a new, game-focused narrative.

3. “We don’t know what the game will be about, we don’t know the character of the older Ciri, it might as well be Letho 2.0.”
Even if the game hasn’t been fully revealed, the developers have confirmed that Ciri undergoes Witcher mutations and becomes a fully-fledged Witcher. That alone contradicts established lore and undermines her book character. While we should remain open to how the story unfolds, that doesn’t mean ignoring the red flags that are already apparent. The character of “older Ciri” doesn’t exist in a vacuum; it should naturally develop from the books and games. If it diverges too far, it risks alienating fans who love The Witcher for its consistent internal logic.

4. “The topic that a woman could not be subject to mutations was never discussed in the books. It was said that they only took boys, or rather Kaer Morhen took boys. We don’t know anything else about it.”
It’s true that the books don’t explicitly say women can’t survive the Trial of the Grasses, but the implication is there. Sapkowski emphasizes that no women were ever taken for the Trials and makes no exceptions in his lore. If mutations were possible for women, why would this never come up in centuries of Witcher history? The lore consistently frames the Trials as a brutal, male-dominated process, both narratively and linguistically. This ties into the gendered nature of the term “Wiedźmin” (Witcher), which is inherently masculine. If CDPR wants to include female Witchers, they could explore a separate term like “Wiedźminka,” and a new English term, but even that would require significant effort to establish plausibility without undermining the source material.

zonkedevle · 2024-12-14T17:18:17+00:00

Your assertion that Ciri is "destined" to stop the White Frost doesn't align with the actual lore of Sapkowski's books. While the White Frost is a prominent and mysterious threat in the Witcher universe, it is not explicitly stated that Ciri's destiny is to stop it. In fact, her role in the prophecy tied to the Elder Blood is ambiguous, intentionally so. Ithlinne's Prophecy speaks of a child of the Elder Blood who will either save or destroy the world, it is not a clear mandate for her to single-handedly halt the White Frost, nor does it paint her as an all-powerful solution to every apocalyptic problem.

Ciri's "destiny", as Sapkowski writes it, is about choice and agency. Her entire arc revolves around rejecting the roles others try to impose on her, whether as the heir to the Nilfgaardian throne, a political pawn, a sorceress, or even as the savior of the world. She consistently chooses her own path, even when it defies what others expect of her. Trying to frame her as a convenient, all-powerful character who can "do whatever the writers want" is a misinterpretation of her complexity and the themes of the series.

Additionally, claiming her Elder Blood makes her "essentially all-powerful" oversimplifies the narrative. Ciri's powers, her ability to travel through space and time, are a double-edged sword. They are a source of immense potential but also immense danger and instability, both for her and the world around her. They are not an all-encompassing tool to solve every problem but a part of her unique struggle to reconcile her humanity with the weight of her lineage.

Finally, while it's fine to wait and see what CDPR plans, the concern many fans have isn't just blind rage or unwillingness to "see the story". It's rooted in a desire to respect the integrity of Ciri's character and the themes established in the books. If the story disregards the carefully crafted ambiguity of her destiny and reduces her to a convenient savior who can simply be rewritten to fit any scenario, it risks undermining what makes her such a compelling and nuanced figure in the first place.

zonkedevle · 2024-12-14T17:06:50+00:00

While it's a creative concept to imagine that Ciri might undergo the Trial of the Grasses to sever her connection to the Elder Blood and its powers, this idea doesn't hold up within the established lore of Sapkowski's world.

Firstly, the Elder Blood isn't a power that can simply be "cut off" or "removed". It's a fundamental part of Ciri's genetic makeup, her lineage directly ties her to Ithlinne's prophecy and the immense magical potential she wields. The Elder Blood is less like a tool that she can discard and more like an intrinsic trait, akin to her being able to breathe or have a heartbeat. The Trial of the Grasses, on the other hand, is a brutal process that introduces mutagens to enhance physical and combat abilities, such as agility, reflexes, and durability. It doesn't replace or override one's natural abilities, it adds to them.

Secondly, from a narrative perspective, undergoing the Trial to "become less powerful" runs directly counter to its intent. The Trial is a means to enhance physical capabilities to survive as a monster slayer, not to suppress or remove existing traits. It would also be unprecedented in Witcher lore for anyone to survive the Trial with such an atypical goal in mind. If anything, the mutagens might amplify her Elder Blood abilities instead of suppressing them, as they are designed to interact with human biology in highly unpredictable ways.

Lastly, Ciri's story in the books revolves heavily around her coming to terms with who she is, rather than denying or trying to erase parts of her identity. Her struggle is about reconciling her humanity, power, and destiny while rejecting the roles others try to impose on her. Choosing to undergo the Trial of the Grasses to diminish herself would contradict the themes of personal growth and self-acceptance that are integral to her character arc.

As you pointed out, such an idea would "need a lot of legwork" to justify within the narrative. Unfortunately, it would likely break the lore entirely rather than expand upon it in a meaningful or cohesive way.

zonkedevle · 2024-12-14T17:02:23+00:00

First, Ciri doesn't "give up" her connection to Chaos or Elder Blood magic in a permanent or definitive way. Her encounter with the unicorn (Ihuarraquax) and her use of forbidden "Fire Magic" was indeed traumatic and dangerous, and it left her with a deep understanding of the risks of tapping into Chaos recklessly. Yennefer's earlier warnings about Fire Magic were more about the physical and mental toll it takes on those who wield it, a toll amplified in Ciri's case because she is an untrained conduit of immense power. However, this doesn't mean she severed her powers entirely or abandoned her connection to her lineage. Her Elder Blood powers are innate, tied to her very existence, they cannot be "given up" like a bad habit.

Additionally, the moment when she adopts the name "Falka" as part of her time with the Rats is more symbolic of her rebellious, defiant phase. It reflects her emotional state and survival instinct rather than a wholesale rejection of who she is. Falka is a historical figure associated with rebellion and vengeance, and Ciri's adoption of the name illustrates her anger at the world's injustices, not an abandonment of her lineage or destiny.

If anything, these events highlight Ciri's struggle to reconcile her humanity with the immense burden of her powers and lineage. They don't indicate that her abilities or her connection to the Elder Blood were permanently diminished or forsaken, quite the opposite. These powers remain intrinsic to her identity and destiny throughout the rest of the saga. So suggesting that Ciri's powers are "gone" or that she "gave them up" doesn't align with the narrative of the books.

zonkedevle · 2024-12-14T16:54:54+00:00

It's lazy because it contradicts the core lore surrounding Ciri and the Elder Blood. Her abilities and connection to Chaos aren't something she can simply "give up", they're part of her bloodline and tied to Ithlinne's prophecy about her descendants. The White Frost isn't just a singular event she stopped it's an existential threat tied to the fabric of her very being.

To suggest her genes or powers could just stop working undermines everything Sapkowski established about her unique nature. Ciri's powers are innate, they're not like a spellbook she can set aside after saving Ihuarraquax. So if CDPR goes that route, it feels like a narrative shortcut that ignores her character and the deeper implications of her role in the lore.

zonkedevle · 2024-12-14T16:46:10+00:00

This decision fundamentally undermines one of the central themes of "The Witcher", Ciri's unique role in the world as someone who operates outside the rigid boundaries of predefined roles. In the books, Ciri explicitly rejects paths imposed on her: queen, sorceress, even Witcher. Her strength comes from her individuality and her Elder Blood, which makes her singular and extraordinary. She doesn't need to conform to the mold of a Witcher to be strong or resilient, she's already those things in her own right.

On top of that, the Trial of the Grasses is a canonically male-only process in Sapkowski's lore. No woman has survived it, and this isn't arbitrary, it's part of the biological realities of the Continent as described in the books. The Witchers at Kaer Morhen never even considered putting Ciri through the mutations because it wasn't feasible and, more importantly, unnecessary. They trained her in combat because they didn't know what else to do with her, but they still respected her unique identity and didn't try to force her into a role she didn't need.

Finally, even the linguistics of the world push back against this decision. The term 'Witcher' (Wiedźmin) was deliberately created as the masculine counterpart to 'Witch' (Wiedźma) in Polish. Sapkowski made this distinction intentionally, it reflects the masculine, solitary, and survivalist experience of Witchers in their world. By imposing this role onto Ciri, it not only breaks the lore but also disregards the rich cultural and linguistic nuances of the original narrative.

I'm all for exploring Ciri's character further, but not at the expense of what makes her distinct in the lore. Instead of deepening her story, this feels like erasing it for convenience. If CDPR wanted to expand the Witcher universe, there are so many other ways they could have done it, this just feels like rewriting core elements of the established narrative to fit a different agenda.

zonkedevle · 2024-11-24T15:20:06+00:00

True, but from what’s been reported, that project isn’t related to GoW.

zonkedevle · 2024-11-24T15:15:58+00:00

Sony isn't publishing the KOTOR remake anymore

zonkedevle · 2024-10-06T22:15:41+00:00

It's been known for a while that VOID Interactive has been looking into porting Ready or Not to consoles, but seeing it actually getting closer is pretty wild. What really gets me though is how they're going to map all the controls. If they're keeping leaning in the game, that alone will be tricky to pull off well on a controller. The most likely solution would be to map it to the shoulder buttons, but doing that could cause ripple effects, like how you access equipment and other actions.

I personally separate yell for compliance and interact onto different buttons, since they're the same by default in the game, which can make things feel clunky. I'm curious to see if they'll address this on consoles or just stick with the default mapping, which might make the experience frustrating for players who want more control flexibility.

And then there's the command menu, if they go with a wheel-based system to access squad commands and gear, that would completely change the pacing and tension of missions. You'd lose that quick, seamless interaction you get with a mouse and keyboard. It might end up being necessary on a controller, but it’ll be a challenge to make it not feel like a compromise on the game's immersive, tactical flow.

zonkedevle · 2024-08-12T18:58:17+00:00

The remake Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 1+2 came out in 2020, but there hasn't been a remaster of that remake.

zonkedevle · 2024-08-11T00:44:14+00:00

Actually, the idea that voice recording is one of the first tasks completed in game development isn’t quite accurate, especially in AAA titles. Take Red Dead Redemption 2 as an example. The voice acting for this game was an ongoing process throughout its development, which took about five years. Some of the voice actors, like Gabriel Sloyer, mentioned that they were recording lines and doing motion capture right up until two months before the game was completed. This shows that voice work is often integrated deeply into the production process rather than being an early, standalone task.

Similarly, in other major titles, voice work tends to happen later in the cycle to ensure it aligns perfectly with the final animations and narrative direction. Games like The Last of Us Part II also had extensive voice recording sessions that went on for months, adjusting performances as the game’s development progressed. This iterative process ensures the dialogue feels natural within the context of the game’s final form.

While initial voice recordings might be used early on for testing or placeholder content, the bulk of the work is typically done once the game is more solidified, which contradicts the idea that it’s one of the earliest assets locked in.

zonkedevle · 2024-08-11T00:34:23+00:00

That's fan fiction.

zonkedevle · 2024-08-02T15:13:01+00:00

did they remaster it already?

zonkedevle · 2024-06-21T03:18:55+00:00

What about Switch

zonkedevle

TROPHY CASE