Greetings,I just registered because I truly think the ending is worth discussing, and I am glad this thing is still going on after a couple of years.I have to confess I didn't finish the original Witcher, in a way it wasn't making a lot of sense to me and the story felt a little broken (English version). I did love the atmosphere, the story, the characters, so I went ahead and read both books published in English so far (The Last Wish, Blood of Elves) and although the translations are not *that* good, I can tell Sapkowski is a great author and I fell in love with the saga. I even watched and enjoyed the Polish miniseries! In any case, I bought the Enhanced Edition a few months ago when it was around 20 dollars and now I regret not having finished it sooner!Anyway, on to this matter. Just like a previous poster I read a bunch of comments but there is no way I could read them all, so here are my thoughts which may reflect something already posted:
I also think that is the most "realistic" conclusion, given the evidence we have at hand. I even figured it out before killing him, I kept thinking of how Triss said he could have travelled in time and I was afraid I would be killing Alvin. However, let's not forget that the premise of the game's story is that Geralt somehow lost his memory, so there is a chance he might have known the Grand Master before and told him things about his visions, that reflect what he told Alvin because, after all, it is his personality emerging from amnesia. Also I suppose there is more than one dimeritium amulet in the world and that some people (i.e. sources) wear them to control/supress their abilities.Macius99 said:1. I have no doubt Jacques is Alvin, the dwimeritium amulet plus Alvin's jump over time and space (as he is Aen Hen Ichaer, just like Cirilla in books) never let me thought otherwise and I'm pretty much surprised someone can be confused here. And when I've red someone thinks it's Emhyr var Emreis, nilfgaardian emperor, I was literally rotfl'ing. Emhyr, whom king Foltest, king Radovid, entire Temerian/Redanian intelligence and probably a big part of Temerian/Redanian nobles have seen at least once in their lives, yet no one recognized him? That's brilliant, really ^^
Yes, I also agree that the assassin is a witcher from another school, and also not Geralt himself. It might also be a mutant created by Salamandra as you mentionedMacius99 said:2. The asassin is clearly a witcher: eyes, reflexes, potion belt etc. Different combat style (different than Kaer Morhen origin?), different preferred weapon (In Kaer Morhen, Vesemir is always teaching witchers how to use one-and-a-half handed sword, simply called "witcher's sword" in game) and not using signs (doesn't feel it's necessary or simply don't know any?) shouldn't block the conclusion that it's a witcher from outside Kaer Morhen, trained differently. The fact that a place like this is not mentioned in any book doesn't mean it doesn't exist; in fact, the idea about him being mutated using stolen witcher's formulas is linked to the game main plot, and besides the short time period to be able to preform such mutation (someone accurately pointed it out earlier) it's quite a good idea. Now: no, the assassin doesn't look like Lambert (for me, not a bit), and no (another rotfl here) it's not Geralt "from the future".
And what if the Grandmaster is not Alvin, but he is also a source capable of visions and "time travel"? Maybe he, too, was given a dimeritium amulet in his youth. Maybe he met with Geralt sometime before the game story and Geralt gave him a speech on his visions and his power.Maybe I'm looking too hard for alternative explanations because having killed Alvin kind of sucks, but that is probably it. Otherwise, why would "Jacques" use witcher-style magic? Didn't he use Aard to repel Geralt's steel sword at the end?Macius99 said:The only characters able to make time travels in Sapkowski's world are some most powerful Aen Seidhe's (elven mages) and Aen Hen Ichaer's (Alvin from game/Cirilla from books). Really, Geralt is not one of them ;-)
Yes, same here. I also wanted an account of what happened with all the choices I made, which somehow is explained in the final passage read by Dandelion but only makes reference to the major political conflict. I wanted to know how other "minor" decisions affected the world in the end.I felt like I was cheating on Yennefer in the game. Why isn't she there? Am I missing something from the books not yet published in English? Arrg! Stupid publishers...Overall this is one of the best RPG's I've ever played, and I LOVE RPG's. It was a little too action oriented for me as I prefer strategic battling in my RPG's (a-la Baldur's Gate), but over all this is just fantastic, it has a lot of depth, story and character development, decision making, and truly teaches a lesson on development and publishing to all major companies. I was amazed that my Enhanced Edition had more goodies than the average Collector's Edition of major companies (looking at you DA:O !). I did pre-order the Collector's Edition of TW2Macius99 said:3. Despite the good story and a bit mysterious ending which I admire, I am greatly disappointed by the fact my romance, on which I was working during at least 3 game acts, wasn't even mentioned in the ending. I am really aware of old Geralt's lack-of-normal-emotions problem, which doesn't allow him to live a normal life, but come on! The old Geralt (from books) had a dream to have a normal family with sorceress Yennefer, and the new Geralt (after reanimation) seems to have the same dream in-game. Why in gods name should the game allow us to start a romance without a way of ending it successfully? IMO designers should have figured out a less frustrating way of informing players about Geralt's emotional problems ;-)