The New Witcher Trilogy is Setting Itself Up for Controversy, but More Games Should Follow Suit

CD Projekt Red has said that it expects the upcoming Witcher trilogy to release within six years. This would mean that entries would be released at a cadence of one every three years, which is a ridiculous pace for any series, let alone an epic fantasy RPG. Granted, this isn’t quite as absurd as it seems: The Witcher 4, including pre-production, has been in development for four years already, and one can imagine that this inaugural Ciri game will set much of the groundwork for its two successors. Still, video games are difficult and expensive endeavors (again, something CDPR is definitely more than aware of), and it’s natural to raise your eyebrows at CD Projekt Red’s seemingly overzealous goals.

Why The Witcher’s Speedy Release Strategy Could Be for the Best

Releasing three games over the course of six years, especially three open-world RPGs (a famously difficult-to-produce genre), is quite ambitious. Some might say it’s too ambitious, actually, which could lead to rushed development. Put plainly, one might expect a series like Call of Duty to adopt a cramped release schedule, but not a series like The Witcher.

Take God of War Ragnarok, for instance. Two of that game’s biggest points of contention are its asset recycling and general absence of major innovations relative to its predecessor. It’s not hard to see why God of War Ragnarok feels so similar to God of War 2018, looking at the pair’s development context: not only did God of War Ragnarok take one less year to develop than God of War 2018, but it was following an already established formula and world. It would have cost considerably more money, resources, and headache to match the ambition of the 2018 game, all while risking the disposal of tried-and-true design elements.

So, God of War Ragnarok focused instead on expanding what was already working in God of War 2018, which allowed Santa Monica Studios to focus on providing a compelling conclusion to the Norse saga. This is where God of War Ragnarok innovates, and it may not have had the space to do so—may not have even been released on time and in a sound state—had it used up so many additional resources by starting from scratch again.

Asset Reuse Can Make for More, Better Games

There’s plenty of valid criticism that can be leveled at too-fast release schedules. Annual or bi-annual franchises like Call of Duty, EA Sports FC (formerly FIFA), and Assassin’s Creed have all been slammed time and again for their lack of innovation and inventiveness, not to mention their bugs and technical issues; jam-packed release schedules are often cited as root causes of such problems. And sure, maybe one game every year is a bit much, but tight launch cycles don’t have to lead to bad games.

There are a number of iconic franchises that don’t break under the weight of their own release schedules, but none are as exemplary as Yakuza/Like a Dragon. There have been a total of nine mainline—that’s not including spin-offs—Yakuza games released by Ryu Ga Gotoku since 2005. This lightning-fast release pace has been facilitated by considerable asset reuse, as most games center on the same locations. Traditionally, this has been the fictional neighborhood of Kamurocho, and even when new locations have been introduced, such as Ijincho and Hawaii, they are often recycled for future releases as well.

And yet, Yakuza still feels more fresh and inventive between releases than certain franchises that remain stagnant in terms of major mechanics and overall storytelling. Yakuza avoids these issues through many techniques, though perhaps none are as significant as narrative design: quests, characters, and subplots can feel remarkably distinct across games, despite content being recycled elsewhere. Like God of War Ragnarok, the Yakuza franchise continues to build upon what came before, rather than throwing everything away with each entry, dousing old ideas with a fresh coat of paint.

How Upcoming Witcher Games Can Thrive, Even with Asset Reuse

While the original Witcher trilogy represents massive evolutions between entries, the next three games don’t necessarily have to be this way. Assuming Ciri’s trilogy is meant to be a cohesive new story, it would actually make sense to keep some of the same locations, characters, and the like between entries. This way, players could experience how the events of each game affect the world and the characters therein. Perhaps CD Projekt Red could even take a page out of Mass Effect‘s book, letting players import their world states and decisions across releases.

Of course, there would still need to be variety and innovation with each new game, but this could come in the form of additions rather than replacements. For instance, maybe Ciri can make some transgression against a faction in one game, leading to a hostile relationship in the next. Or perhaps years could pass between games, leading to new cities or settlements in the world. Each new Witcher game could be like adding new ingredients to a stew, rather than making a new dish altogether.

Why More Franchises May Want to Follow The Witcher’s Lead

In defense of Assassin’s Creed, its franchise premise essentially demands that it provide radically new environments, characters, enemies, and other assets between entries. But not every series is like this. There are plenty of properties, including Resident Evil, Pokémon, and Final Fantasy, that could thrive by building rather than starting from scratch. Innovation is essential, but it doesn’t need to be dramatic and all-encompassing to be impactful. Asset reuse can be an effective, creative, fiscally responsible way to develop a franchise, and it doesn’t have to mean stagnation in the writing or gameplay departments. One could even argue that it’s better to have a series that unfolds and expands with each entry, rather than one that scraps all old ideas in favor of constant novelty.