"It's for sure less guided but I would say that simulation is too far," Tomaszkiewicz clarifies. "We're taking from our previous experience [The Witcher 3], the things we feel that makes the quest cool - how to build the storytelling in a way that you are engaged and you are immersed, but giving you more freedom."

I would actually like it if the devs leaned more into the simulation aspect, if they are going to lean into more of a sandbox experience. With 155 people onboard to make the game there should be plenty of knowhow and resources to make it happen.

"Our game is more similar in this area to the old Fallout, the first and second [games], where you have a clear goal and everything is optional - you decide. You travel the world, you decide what you want to do. There is no main quest."

As someone who likes the first two Fallout games over everything else published into the series, I'm fine with this. Also, as a TTRPG sandbox nerd this makes me more interested in the game.

The more effect you have, the more the gauge will fill; and the more the gauge fills, the more actions the antagonist will take against you, such as passing edicts to close shops and sending assassins against you. "We wanted to create a world which reacts to what you are doing," Tomaszkiewicz says.

Going to express skepticism about how well the system is going to be able respond to player agency, but also hope to see something special. Maybe there will be some kind of AI director to keep things interesting based on what you do in the game. Kind of like how things work in Rimworld? I would be cool with that but skeptical about how things might work outside of a colony builder.

Anyhow, I'll keep an eye out for what might happen sometime next year.