While The Witcher 3 Remastered overhauls its skill trees and makes combat more fluid, I worry it loses some of the RPG’s signature grit.
The Witcher 3 is easily one of the greatest games of all time. 11 years on, it's still an apex-tier RPG; one whose moral dilemmas have sparked many a debate at my Vampire: The Masquerade table, and whose story lives on in the hearts of so many. You could argue, then, that it doesn't need a remaster: a fresh coat of paint always helps jazz things up a bit, but it's not essential to a good experience. It's the old 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' moment: it begs the question: did we need The Witcher 3 Remastered?
I'll note straight off the bat that this is a free upgrade for anyone who owns the base game. While you can buy the remaster itself for $50 (which includes twin DLCs Hearts of Stone and Blood and Wine), I get the sense that CD Projekt Red isn't trying to milk the nostalgia-tinged masses here. In many ways, it reads as more of a thank you than anything else, and perhaps provides some of the visual and quality-of-life adjustments that are required ahead of Songs of the Past.
After a few hours retreading age-old paths, I've decided that the remaster does a lot right, which I'm sure you're happy to hear. But I'd also argue that it perhaps loses some of the grit of the original.
For the purpose of this mini review, my partner was playing base The Witcher 3 on his PC, while I was playing the remaster on mine. We both started back at the beginning, with the same graphics settings - ultra, with a few bells and whistles removed. I was immediately struck by how colorful my version of the game was - White Orchard is in full bloom, with bright green grass, glittering lakes, and vibrant flowers. As the sun began to rise on the horizon, the remaster's enhanced lighting blew me away; it looked absolutely spectacular.
As Roach and I galloped through rolling green fields and farmland, the plants around me looked more realistic, parting more organically. My equine friend felt more reactive, too, feeling somewhat stubborn and untamable in his own way. I'd argue that these changes are all relatively subtle, but they make the world feel more alive, especially in these more foliage-heavy areas.
I do, however, feel like everything was perhaps a little too colorful. While there are zones in The Witcher 3 that are more reminiscent of the traditional Polish countryside (White Orchard is a great example), it felt like the vibrancy had been ramped up to a hundred. It made things more readable, but I think it takes away from the gritty feel of The Witcher - at the end of the day, this is a game about war and killing monsters. The cartoon-esque, sometimes slightly blocky colors don't quite fit here.After killing a pack of wolves, for example, the blood splatters were almost pillar-box red - think Marilyn Monroe's lipstick. On Ross's screen, by contrast, it looked darker red; more syrupy, as blood should be.
This is enhanced by how generally 'warm' the game feels. During the ever-iconic bath scene and my first interaction with Yennefer (well, kind of interaction), the warmth of the candles felt like they somewhat softened Geralt and Yennefer's features. Those twisting back scars felt a little more obscured, but in this situation, the lighting works because the scene takes place in a candlelit setting.
سەرچاوەی فەرمی بە زمانی ئینگلیزی: https://www.pcgamesn.com/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt/remastered-review
