Many were disappointed when CD Projekt Red announced it The Witcher 4 would not be released in 2026; The developer has not yet linked the title with a firm release date. This is understandable though – good games take time and shouldn't be rushed, and CDPR should know that better than most AAA studios at this point. It is therefore more recent claims about The Witcher 4 is particularly shocking.
CD Projekt Red has said that they expect what's to come Witcher the trilogy will be released within six years. This would mean that entries would be released on a cadence of every three years, which is a ridiculous pace for any series, let alone an epic fantasy RPG. Of course, this is not quite as absurd as it seems: The Witcher 4including pre-production, has already been in development for four years, and one can imagine that this first 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 eyebrows at CD Projekt Red's seemingly overzealous goals.
Why The Witcher's Speedy Release Strategy Could Be The Best
Releasing three games in the space of six years, especially three open-world RPGs (a notoriously difficult genre to produce), is pretty ambitious. Some might say that it is actually too ambitious, which could lead to hasty development. Simply put, you can expect a series that Call of Duty to adopt a tight release schedule, but not a series that The Witcher.
Take God of War Ragnarokfor example. Two of that game's biggest points of contention are its asset recycling and general absence of major innovations compared to its predecessor. It's not hard to see why God of War Ragnarok feels so similar God of war 2018, looking at the couple's developmental context: not only did it God of War Ragnarok take a year less to develop than God of war 2018, but it followed an already established formula and world. It would have cost significantly more money, resources, and headaches to match the ambition with 2018's games, while risking discarding proven design elements.
So, God of War Ragnarok instead focused 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 is innovating, and it might not have had room to do so—may not even have been released on time and in a good state—if it had used so much extra resources starting from scratch.
Asset reuse can provide more, better games
There are plenty of valid criticisms that can be leveled at too-quick release schedules. Annual or biennial franchise agreements such as Call of Duty, EA Sports FC (before FIFA), and Assassin's Creed have all been reviled time and time again for their lack of innovation and ingenuity, not to mention their bugs and technical issues; busy release schedules are often cited as root causes of such problems. And sure, maybe one game every year is a bit much, but tight release 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 quite as exemplary as Yakuza/Like a dragon. There have been a total of nine main lines – that's not including spin-offs –Yakuza games released by Ryu Ga Gotoku since 2005. This lightning-fast release rate has been facilitated by significant asset reuse, as most games center on the same locations. Traditionally, this has been the fictional district of Kamurocho, and even when new locations are 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 some franchises that remain stagnant in terms of big mechanics and overarching storytelling. Yakuza avoids these problems through many techniques, though perhaps none as significant as narrative design: quests, characters, and subplots can feel remarkably different in-game, despite content being recycled elsewhere. As God of War Ragnarokthe Yakuza franchise continues to build on 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 huge developments between the entries, the next three games don't necessarily have to be like this. 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. In this way, players can experience how the events of each game affect the world and the characters in it. Maybe CD Projekt Red could even remove a page Mass effects book, which allows players to import their world states and decisions in different versions.
Of course, there would still be a need for variety and innovation with each new game, but this could come in the form of additions rather than replacements. For example, Ciri might commit some offense against a faction in one game, leading to a hostile relationship in the next. Or maybe years can pass between games, leading to new cities or settlements in the world. Each new Witcher games can be like adding new ingredients to a stew, rather than making a new dish entirely.
Worth noting is that the original Witcher the trilogy was released over a period of 8 years. With the help of modern technology like UE5, it's not too unrealistic to think that CDPR could reduce this release schedule by two years.
Why More Franchises May Want to Follow The Witcher's Lead
In defense of Assassin's Creedits franchise premise essentially requires it to provide radically new environments, characters, enemies, and other assets between entries. But not all series are like this. There are plenty of properties, i.a Resident Evil, Pokémonand Final Fantasywhich could be developed by building rather than starting from scratch. Innovation is important, but it doesn't have to be dramatic and all-encompassing to have an impact. Asset reuse can be an efficient, creative, and financially responsible way to grow 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 evolves and expands with each entry, rather than one that scraps all old ideas in favor of constant novelty.
