I agree. Always had a more "girly" voice in my mind. Really dislike the voice. Hopefully the german one is better.
I agree. Always had a more "girly" voice in my mind. Really dislike the voice. Hopefully the german one is better.
Looks like ign has finished the month with some exclusive CIRI gameplay. A part of me wants to click but another feels content with provided gameplay already. I think I'll forego checking it out and leave console footage as the last videos I take in (if available pre launch). Either way the CIRI footage should be great for those curious!
Seems a bit too early to judge her VA, I think. She barely says anything there.
It does sound like Jo Wyatt though, so I'm still hyped.
You and me both. I'm trying to stay in the dark at this point and leave the Ciri sections as a surprise for when I play.
The struggle is real.
I like her voice. Her strong english accent shows the different education she received and the higher social status she has.
I had to google it...
Female Hawke from DA2...Hmm...
I erased that game from my memory....
I had to google it...
Female Hawke from DA2...Hmm...
I erased that game from my memory....
Good man. She was the only reason I managed to finish that clusterfuck. :listen:
She has good voice, good acting skills, and, I hope, will do a good job as Ciri. And we know the game will turn out better than DA2.
Same here, I would really try to do the best I can for her as if she were my own daughter. But I'm disapointed by the short video section we've seen, animations seem too rigid and fight boring, hopefully it is the player's fault but maybe introducing a 2nd playable character was too ambitious in an already ambitious game...
I think Ciri's voice will be ok, but when she shouts combat stuff its really out of place.
Its a mix of being too loud, and as if the actress was too close to the mic, and some repetition but that cant be avoided well.
Its a mix of being too loud, and as if the actress was too close to the mic, and some repetition but that cant be avoided well.
You are betting on a fight.MAJOR BOOKS SPOILER ALARM! Don't read if you haven't read the books yet.
There is a basic misconception here: the one that "real" characters work like robots or purely mathematicallay driven virtual entities. Ciri and Geralt were "real" characters in the books. A "real" fight can lead to many outcomes. Even the best sword fighter might die in a simple fight, no matter if theoretically(!!!) nobody should be able to beat him. Real characters make mistakes. Real characters do ingenious or stupid things. Real characters have emotions that might lead to victory or defeat no matter the skill factor.
So no, if Ciri was able to kill Bonhart then there is no way to say for sure that Geralt would have beaten him as well in a real fight. That's just not how "real" characters in a "real" situation work.
And I might remember you that the world's best sword fighter died at the hand of a poor peasants without any weapon skill at all at the end of the books. That completely destroys your theory. Not even to mention that Vilgefortz, the world's most powerful person, was killed by the hand of a simple Witcher, not because he had more skill but because Vilgefortz made a crucial mistake in their last encounter - and Geralt had the element of surprise on his side. It's the little things that can radically change the outcome of a real encounter.
So give me a fucking break, yeah. Don't make up arguments based on the misconception that people were robots...
Fighter 1: You are told that he was mutated to be faster and stronger, has 80 years of fighting experience, and he is famous to be one if not the best swordsmen alive.
Fighter 2: You are told that she is not mutated, she is in her 20s, and she was talented with a sword as a child.
Anyone who is reasonable would bet on fighter 1, because based on a logical analysis and statistics there is a much higher possibility that fighter 1 would win.
Of course circumstances play a role, and things can go wrong.
But what are the chances of that happening ?
Are you willing to risk 10,000$ on the fact that things might go wrong for fighter 1 ?
Even if You factor emotions into the fight, I assure you Geralt has the advantage. He is a Witcher, and Witchers are said to be emotionless. I actually disagree that Witchers are emotionless, but I think the superstition comes from the fact that they are trained to be emotionless while killing. Geralt has lived for at least 90 years, but on the other hand you have a girl in her 20s with hormones raging in her body. I am sure Geralt is more emotionally stable than Ciri, and he has had more experience with controlling his emotions due to 80 years of fighting.
Geralt was not defeated by the peasant in his last fight, and he easily defeated the peasant and could have killed him on the spot. He was killed after he won the fight because he spared the peasants life. We are talking about Geralt fighting Bonhart, and what would the result of the fight be. We are not talking what would happen if Geralt spared Bonhart's life after he defeated him.
Geralt going against Vilgefortz is like a swordsman going against someone who is equipped with a machine gun. Mages have long range attacks. geralt defeated Vilgefortz with the help of Yennefer, who is a mage herself. And as far as I remember Bonhart was no a mage, and he was a good old regular human.
Also in a conversation Yennefer told Bonhart that him fighting Geralt would be like a kitten fighting a wolf. You might argue that she was biased, but at the end of the day I do not think she wanted to encourage Bonhart to fight Geralt if she was unsure that Geralt could take him. Yen is a very smart woman, and she knows that she could not scare Bonhart with her statement.
Witchers are the closest things to a robot you get. They are trained to be emotionless, they are born with one purpose, and the purpose is killing. but that's besides the point.
I still think that CDPR is nerfing Geralt, but I respect other people's opinions. So you have a fucking break from me
Your post acutally amuses me quite a lot. You really believe in this nerd stuff, discussing which superhero or whoever would win theoretical fight X?
A (good) writer can let everbody win every fight and everyone die every minute.
Vilgefortz twice beats the living shit out of Geralt without using spells directly on him. The iron staff can't be parried (too heavy for a sword to turn), and he is fast and has reach advantage.
It is only through Geralt's passive spell courtesy of Ms Vigo that he bests Vilgefortz, and that is after Vilgefortz 'defeats' Yennefer and vaporises a high vampire using spells.
To be fair. Vilgefortz was a badly written character. Heavily overpowered and evil for the sake of being evil. No idea what Mr. Sapkowski thought while writing him.
edit: Speaking about overpowered book characters. Does anybody else think that the King of the Wild Hunt won't be the main antagonist? Imo he is a too obvious choice and I don't expect something that obvious from CDP.
Anybody else think
edit: Speaking about overpowered book characters. Does anybody else think that the King of the Wild Hunt won't be the main antagonist? Imo he is a too obvious choice and I don't expect something that obvious from CDP.
Anybody else think
Avallac'h will appear in Witcher 3?
Last edited: