The unfulfilled love between Yennefer and Ciri and an incomplete family

[Lytha]

Again, in the game, there is an opportunity for Yen and Geralt to chat about it. She mentions that she never did thank him for that and he said that she would have done the same for him to which she said no, she wouldn't have. And frankly, she didn't because when she did recover her memory, she did nothing to contact him.

Mhm. Yes, I have difficulties imagining Yen storming blindly off to chase the Wild Hunt who had kidnapped Geralt. I think she would have gone to a good library, have done research, thought it over, selected some options, and then tried to locate them with magic, contrary to Geralt's impulsive methods of blindly running around in the wilderness.

Anyway, you seem to miss a little detail, when accusing Yen of not seeking Geralt after her memory was returned by the mages who served the people who held her imprisoned at the time. That little detail would be the surprising fact that she was inconveniently imprisoned at the time and thus sort of not in a position to locate Geralt.

When Emhyr set her on Ciri's trail and got the "regicides are fun!"-assassination plot going, we were already well into the events of TW1 - meaning that the henna-haired one already had done her move and was broadcasting in the sorceress megascope-twitter world about it (compare her chat with "Keira-Philippa" in TW1), and so Yen had all the reasons in the world to be upset that Geralt had apparently run off with that cow, while she herself was in jail.

 

[Kallelinski]

Mhm. Yes, I have difficulties imagining Yen storming blindly off to chase the Wild Hunt who had kidnapped Geralt. I think she would have gone to a good library, have done research, thought it over, selected some options, and then tried to locate them with magic, contrary to Geralt's impulsive methods of blindly running around in the wilderness.

Anyway, you seem to miss a little detail, when accusing Yen of not seeking Geralt after her memory was returned by the mages who served the people who held her imprisoned at the time. That little detail would be the surprising fact that she was inconveniently imprisoned at the time and thus sort of not in a position to locate Geralt.

When Emhyr set her on Ciri's trail and got the "regicides are fun!"-assassination plot going, we were already well into the events of TW1 - meaning that the henna-haired one already had done her move and was broadcasting in the sorceress megascope-twitter world about it (compare her chat with "Keira-Philippa" in TW1), and so Yen had all the reasons in the world to be upset that Geralt had apparently run off with that cow, while she herself was in jail.

I think I even once calculated how much "free time" Yennefer actually had, just a couple of months compared to Geralt having almost 3 years. If she also was with Emhyr, she was most likely deep down in Nilfgaard, several hundreds of kilometres away from Geralt. The only difference was that Yennefer had people helping her getting rid of the amnesia, just imagine Geralt had people among him doing the same, ops.

When Geralt got his memory back (on his own) at the end of Witcher 2, he pretty much immediately went south to look for Yennefer. While during this he got Yennefer's letter, therefore the beginning of Witcher 3. There was almost no time in which Yennefer had been able to contact him any sooner, because she was either imprisoned or had no opportunity to do so.

Also do you really think the Lodge (and/or Triss) would have allowed that? How do you send a letter to someone without an adress anyway?

In Witcher 1 Triss was even spying for the Lodge regarding Geralt, that's not a guess, it is shown in the games. She is being told to keep an eye on him. That's also why Geralt is angry with her at the end of Witcher 2, because he demands answers for her actions.

Also even though people accuse Yennefer all the time of controlling Geralt's life, she never forced him to stay nor force him to come back to her, not once. It's actually Geralt who always comes back to her, she was even furious about this inconsistent way of treatment, therefore she was also quite surprised he didn't look after her immediately again, because that's what he always did, even in the games!
Geralt followed the Wild Hunt to rescue Yennefer until he succeeded, then she lost her memory and when she finally got it back, the first news she gets about Geralt is that he is bedding with red hair. Seems to be great news to hear and even though she still wrote him anyway, but hey, let's put all the blame on her...



Ahh, I see nothing really changed, the same comments, the same reactions and still no reply by a RED. Old year, new year, all the same I guess.

 

[eloise]

Ah, look at me necro'ing threads like that!
Forgive me, I avoided the forums for two years in order to play Wild Hunt without preconceptions and yet now I feel like I had to come here back then to support threads and opinions like the OP's.
Now, it's too late, I know... there's the Gwent game and Cyberpunk 2077 and the world of the Witcher is long gone, no chance to see small things fixed, we have to give up and accept that it is what it is, I guess.
But still...

 

[Kayhan2000]

I think for those changes it is too late now... :/

 

[eloise]

A picture like this has a more compellling quality than hours of Wild Hunt gameplay in regards to the relationship between Ciri and Yennefer. It's a misstep that CD PR seemingly don't want to fix... and it doesn't take much, only a cathartic moment between the two of them - with or without Geralt - on the ship to Ard Skellig. A simple word - "mother" - spoken when they finally reunite in Kaer Morhen.
What do we have instead?
This
https://youtu.be/yXQjoUEVBx8?t=55s
Yennefer totally cut out from their lives, as if she was a stranger or - worse - a schemer who could likely make a move against them.

 

[NukeTheMoon]

In reply to OP...

I feel the lack of being more indepth on relationship between Ciri and Yennifer has a lot to do with what the story line was required to do; as in who it was for.
The game story aimed to be both an continuation of the books, the first two games, and yet had to be relevant to be who had never read the books, or played the games.
So certain aspect of the series were cut out.

Also, I think going behind the decision on this is they wanted the choice between Yennifer and Triss to be a personal decision based on the player's view of their relationship with Geralt.
Telling the player through demonstration "Hey, choose Yen and you're reuniting the family, choose Triss and you're choosing a home-wrecker!" would sort of throw that decision out of the gray area the decisions in this game try to occupy.

 

[sv3672]

Also, I think going behind the decision on this is they wanted the choice between Yennifer and Triss to be a personal decision based on the player's view of their relationship with Geralt.

I do not think this has anything to do with the choice between Triss and Yennefer, the developers themselves even said that more than once, continuing to blame it on the choice just shows what the OP's real motives might be. Or, to put it in another way, in a hypothetical version of the game where Triss was removed completely, in my opinion there would not have been more interaction between Ciri and Yennefer anyway.

That is because the game focuses on interaction between the player's character (Geralt) and NPCs, it is not like a book where you can read dialogues and monologues from anyone's point of view at any time. The "familiy" relationship is also shown already in the prologue, it would not serve any purpose in the story to constantly remind the player of it, other than where it really matters, like at the reunion in Kaer Morhen. Finally, Ciri in the game can reasonably be different from what she was like in the books, she has grown up, and her becoming independent is an important theme throughout the game. She would live mostly separately from Geralt after the ending, she is an adult, so there is no real family wrecking that could be done at this point.

In short, there is not really a problem to be fixed here, obviously the developers had a different vision than the OP, but they cannot please everyone. Not that there would be a real chance of it happening regardless, the game is no longer actively worked on since the end of 2016, there are no plans to release any patches, enhanced edition, DLCs or anything.

 

[NukeTheMoon]

In short, there is not really a problem to be fixed here, obviously the developers had a different vision than the OP, but they cannot please everyone. Not that there would be a real chance of it happening regardless, the game is no longer actively worked on since the end of 2016, there are no plans to release any patches, enhanced edition, DLCs or anything.

His motives seem pretty clear; The OP is dissatisfied with a element of the story, and that's their right, as Geralt might say like when talking with Istredd.

But as someone who didn't know what The Witcher was before a few months ago, I can understand someone who might have been following a series for a long time, got heavily invested in it, had a hope of closure in certain elements, but didn't get it.
It sucks, sometimes it even hurts.

However my perspective on it is simply as you said, that they cannot please everyone. Too much of the main story including past and ongoing relationships of too many characters, all being things you need to of read/listened the book to understand, would simply not in service to most of the expected customers. I would honestly be surprised if 10% of the players of TW3 read the books.

I was blown away by the story of TW3, and Blood and Wine. And for me the games SAVED the series by my measure, given how much I dislike the last book in the series.
And like you said, The Witcher, has come to a close. It was a wild ride.