Mister Wolf
Gold Member
What can I say Geralt.....Ol green eyes gon miss ya.
Is it true that in the books, Geraltdies at the end? He doesn't live happily ever after with Yennifer?
There will probably be a new main character, can't imagine they stop making Witcher games
Yeah. But it would be kind of lame if they just created a new random dude. There is one perfect candidate to pick up where he left off. (End game spoilers)
Ciri. The ending I got was that she became a witcher. It would be perfect if they made that the canon ending. She's a great character,and really badass too. They could have a greater emphasis on magic since she's better at that, and they could cut out/tone down the potions since she hasn't gone through the mutation process and can't take drink them. (I personality dislike the potion and inventory management parts of the game anyway)
Geralt dies, and Yennifer dies trying to resurrect him. Ciri drops their bodies off in an unknown island (CDPR calls it the Isle of Avallach) where Geralt wakes up in Yennifer's arms. They're content to be alone together but curious about where they are. So their death kinda was their happy ending. Ciri leaves the Witcher universe behind to start a new life in the lands of King Arthur. Witcher 1 happens 5 years after the books with Geralt returning with no memory. Witcher 2 he has flashbacks that fill in the gaps.
You saidWitcher 1 happens after the books. So none of the content featured in the games is in the books at all?
Question about the endings.Is there a canon ending for Witcher 3? The two "good" endings were so different it could be hard to go on from there.
NopeYou saidWitcher 1 happens after the books. So none of the content featured in the games is in the books at all?
Nope
And in fact, the author seemingly hates the games.
Nope
And in fact, the author seemingly hates the games.
You saidWitcher 1 happens after the books. So none of the content featured in the games is in the books at all?
Technically a part of the beginning/tutorial of TW3 is from the books, but that's like 0,005% of the game.
Zero percent.
Nope
And in fact, the author seemingly hates the games.
Technically a part of the beginning/tutorial of TW3 is from the books, but that's like 0,005% of the game.
Whaat. This is blowing my mind right now.
I thought the games were just a video game adaption of what happened in the books. So the Witcher games are basically their own thing then, just sharing the characters/locations from the books.
Great. I'm hoping Iorveth makes a comeback this time, i liked him in TW2 more than Roche
Yo my boy Iorveth better be back
I'm sad that that we didn't get another chance to catch up on Saskia and Iorveth but oh well.
That said looking forward to one more time with Geralt.
Iroveth almost has to appear in the DLC. Hes the one hanging thread from CDPRs Witcher story. As for Saskia, the comic that came along with HoS...pretty much says that she died when Nilfgaard invaded Vergen.
Yeah, he's the one loose end for me from W2 that I want to see.
Marcin: "As much as I would love to see Iorveth in the game myself, that's not going to happen - sorry. Same goes for Saskia."
"If it is not too much to ask, is there a particular reason why not?
Or have you just decided, that the Iorveth/Saskia storyline ended with Witcher 2 and there wasn't anything left to tell?"
"We're going to a completely new region in BaW, with new characters, places, intrigues, quests, etc. Including these characters in the storyline wouldn't make much sense, I'm afraid. I feel your pain though - Iorveth was my favorite character in W2."
Geralt dies, and Yennifer dies trying to resurrect him.
Yeah.
The games are basically fanfiction.
I still haven't found a compelling argument to use that character for a pickup. I enjoy them fine, more than fine really, but their canon character is too far removed from the same core that makes moral ambiguous choices (an absolute key stone of the game series) even possible to their full extent like with Geralt or even Lambert (unless I'm missing a great detail from the books).
I have faith in CDPR as a developer at this point, so I know that in their current state they could work with a box of scraps in a cave and make do. The workmanship there is nothing I doubt.
However, for seeing that character as such a vocal choice around the forums, I'm not convinced.
Zero percent.
You are missing some great detail. But that line of thinking isn't something out of ordinary on these forums, so it's probable it's not entirely your fault.
Ciri would be a great protagonist, even if her character is very different from Geralt's. If you can't see that, I kind of blame the game writers for that. They sanitized her personality a bit, made her basically "the best version of herself". In the books she had a lot more edge to her, and by edge I mean some dark, disturbing stuff. You could say she got over it during her travel, and some of it is hinted at, but she definitely wasn't this pure goodness that some players think she is. In fact, Sapkowski (original author) is on record saying that while in the books Geralt represents the good, she is supposed to be the evil. He simplified that statement obviously and fully understanding it requires context and knowledge about how their arcs are constructed in the novels - but there's a lot that could be drawn to the forefront if she got her game. Yes, her personal dilemmas would be different, but I can't see how putting her in morally complex situations wouldn't work. If anything, that would provide a welcome change in perspective and freshness.
I do have my fears whether the writers would be able to write her to convey it all well, but if they finally got it right in TW3 with Geralt and Yennefer, I have faith that Ciri is also doable.
While Sapkowski wrote some great books, I think he is just too old to really understand the video game medium, while also being very proud of a story and characters he views as his own. Might be an ego thing coming in, but I remember him being rather salty/defensive when people brought up the story in the Witcher games.
In regards to Blood and Wine, I can't wait. I'm replaying Witcher 3 on NG+/death march, and really realized how much I LOVE this game. Easily my favourite game this gen. Being a fan of the series + the books made me appreciate this final entry all the more. I'm actually saddened that this is the end of Geralt, because I love the character to death. That said, all things must come to an end, and they couldn't have given the character a better send off with Witcher 3. If Blood and Wine keeps the quality of the main game + Heart of Stone, i'll be as happy as can be. If it somehow manages to top it....
Yes. You can only go into NG+ if you start a new game.
Yennefer doesn't die, she merely collapses from exhaustion.
No, pretty sure it just raised their levels again to accommodate. They're still in your inventory.Will going into NG+ take away my mastercrafted armor I grinded for?
Because they know they kinda screwed up withOne of things CDPR wanted to do for the expansion was to create a more charismatic enemy for Geralt to face, as well as develop a more complex story they believe players will appreciate.
O'Dimm telling you toMost likely Empress.
It's the only good ending which I like...
CD Projekt Red in general doesn't have a great track record when it comes to adapting primary characters. It took them three games until Geralt started showing signs of his original personality. In that time Triss was completely reinvented two times, but never quite aligned with her original characterization. Dandelion changes from game to game, but you never get a sense that he and Geralt have any reason to be friends. Yennefer is honestly the only character they've managed to get just right, I was surprised by how much she sounds like her book counterpart, compared to everyone else.I can't speak for the books as I haven't (yet) read them, but this dampens the spirit a bit. The way I'm hearing Ciri described here, I would have no issues with her as a protagonist. Why go with such a cleaner yet a touch mischievous! version for the game then? I appreciate letting me in on more details according to her original design, it's closer to what I recall book readers getting excited over when she was initially announced for Witcher 3 years back.
Again, I still really like her in Witcher 3, but that synopsis sounds closer to what I'd prefer for a candidate going forward. I'm certain her great travels had the potential to execute the most base instincts out of a person. It's brought up in the game, but doesn't fully show through her character as I'd like.
You were describing what happens in the books where she's last described as "still unconscious."
That description or anything like it appears nowhere in my translation.You were describing what happens in the books where she's last described as "still unconscious."
It's like Stephen King who didn't understand Stanley Kubrick's version of Shining.
Will going into NG+ take away my mastercrafted armor I grinded for?
I'm looking at the Polish text, so I don't know what the translator did there, but that's exactly what it says when Dandelion carries her to the boat.That description or anything like it appears nowhere in my translation.
The reasoning as to why it would be unlikely for him to appear in this particular expansion makes sense, but it still begs the question why he was excluded from the main game. What a wasted opportunity, and this is coming from someone who actually preferred the Roche path.
Most likely Empress. If you finish HoS before finding Ciri it is hinted at that that is the canon ending. If you side with Mirror Man you can ask for wishes.
If you have not found Ciri yet you can ask about Ciri. He explains in detail what you *need* to do which leads to that ending. It's pretty cool.
It's the only good ending which I like as well so even cooler! (Not that the other good is bad but... not even close to giving the same closure)and manly tears ;(
On phone so can't look but it's on Youtube.
Edit - here https://youtu.be/j3oGWhfVku4
It's like Hearts of Stone. Side story. That's why I'd play HoS and Blood and Wine after finishing the game. That way I get the good ending whereWonder if it was still be set before the Wild Hunt ending, as with Heart of Stone.
One thing that really struck me during Heart of Stone, but also during the last couple weeks as I did a NewGame+, is the sort of 'ludonarrative dissonance' between the main story and the constant side quests. The game sort of promotes a sense of urgency for most of the main story.
During my new game, I tried to play it 'realistic' in the sense that, I tried to frame all my decisions based on the 'canon story.' So, considering some of Geralt's canon morale choices, and the urgency of the main story, how would 'that' character treat a lot of other choices in the game.
And I found myself basically ignoring most of the side quests because they made no sense =p The notion of doing Heart of Stone before the ending seemed sort of odd, too.
So I wonder of Blood and Wine will be the same way.
Not a big deal, mind you. Easy to suspend disbelief about it, too... cuz, you know, it's a game and it's fun. But starting with GTA V, I've sort of been more interested in sort games trying to create less dissonance between gameplay and story, and it just sort of struck me recently as I replayed the game that the vast majority of the side quests, I can't imagine Geralt actually wasting time on with more pressing urgent business.