The Witcher Remake Story Designer Warns Going More Open-World Changes Everything
The Witcher remake has plenty of fans already debating what it should keep from the original—and what it must modernize. Lead story designer Artur Ganszyniec says the team has clear priorities, while also warning that going “more open-world” could fundamentally change the project’s pacing, cost, and feasibility.
What Fool’s Theory is worried about
Ganszyniec frames the original release as a small, scrappy effort rather than a big-budget production, describing the remake’s starting point as something closer to “modding” work—an enthusiastic push against engine limitations to create something new with limited resources.
He also acknowledges why The Witcher 3 feels like the natural endpoint of CD Projekt Red’s ambitions. In his view, the third game is “spiritually closer” to the version they would have made with better time, money, technology, and skills. Still, looking back at the 2007 cult classic, he doesn’t think simply copying more of The Witcher 3’s structure is the right move for Fool’s Theory’s remake.
Why an open-world approach may break the remake
Ganszyniec doubts that expanding the map into a fuller open-world would be compatible with how the first game was built. He argues that once you give players more physical space, you immediately need more content to fill that space—otherwise the experience loses its rhythm and scale.
In the original design, the team could reliably anticipate where the player would be at any moment, letting them place triggers, start scenes, and control key moments with precision—for example, having a character appear between specific areas like fields and a village. In an open-world setting, he says, those setups would have to be handled in a completely different way.
He points to the fifth act as a place where the seams would show. The game’s map centers on Lake Vizima, and if the area were truly open, players might reasonably grab a boat from the outskirts of Vizima and head straight for an old manor. He notes that this might sound exciting from a player perspective, but from a design standpoint it would feel like the team’s careful pacing starts falling apart.
Overall, he warns that turning a remake into something closer to a reimagining could become impractical. He questions how long path proliferation remains worth the effort—arguing that infinite time and money won’t necessarily translate into infinite new players, and that eventually costs and returns diverge.
- Ganszyniec says open-world expansion would require more content and would shift tempo and scale.
- He argues the original’s pacing relies on knowing the player’s likely location at any given moment.
- He highlights the fifth act around Lake Vizima as an area where open-world freedom could disrupt intended progression.
- He cautions that making a remake “more like” The Witcher 3 risks turning it into a costly reimagining rather than a practical remake.
What should change—and what should stay
While he pushes back on the idea of leaning harder into open-world design, Ganszyniec says the remake should still adjust key elements. His suggested targets include removing the infamous romance cards, overhauling combat, and improving level design.
At the same time, he supports keeping the amnesiac storyline. He argues it helps control scope while also giving new players a smoother entry point, including those who haven’t read the books that came before. He also notes that Geralt’s ignorance about Yennefer and Ciri could unsettle returning fans, but could make the first game a stronger on-ramp going forward—potentially easing newcomers into The Witcher 3 and then onward to The Witcher 4.
Subscribe to the newsletter for Witcher remake insight
The takeaway from Ganszyniec is that Fool’s Theory is aiming for targeted modernization rather than a wholesale structural rewrite. If the studio follows that approach, the remake could preserve what made the original a distinctive first step—while sanding down the dated systems that hold it back today.
