That basically sums up what I feel.
EDIT:
Btw, are you going to make a blog post about TW3 (and the *other* really popular RPG?)? I really like reading your blog posts about politics and characters.
Last edited:
That basically sums up what I feel.
EDIT:
Btw, are you going to make a blog post about TW3 (and the *other* really popular RPG?)? I really like reading your blog posts about politics and characters.
I am glad you enjoyed them.
But no, I won't write political articles. It does not inspire me and I don't have the time to do so, unfortunately.
Last edited:
I'd probably quit the Witcher series with the North enslaved to Nilfgaard as the games' canonical ending. I confess to being a book reader, though.
Then again, I'm trying to wrap my head around the idea of Nilfgaard winning as a good thing when we saw in White Orchard and Velen their brutally draining the local populace dry, while engaging in all sorts of horrific war crimes. In Velen, the very worst of humanity collaborates with Nilfgaard.
Last edited:
You got the point, but ending credits shows nilfgard as good thing, i read the books too, think emhyr is very bad person but game dont show it, even in end scene nilfgard soldiers are retreating while redanians butcher people searching witches
CDPR royally fucked up with Radovid, that's what destroys the politics. Everything else would survive if they didn't make Radovid a drooling lunatic. There was nothing to suggest he'd slaughter non-humans for fun. I mean if you're going to make him into a character who burns alchemists alive, why let Geralt, a literal mutant who uses magic in public, walk around your cities and soldiers and even do jobs for you.
Wasn't not-Ciri married to Emhyr at the end of the books? I realize it was pretty common knowledge that it wasn't actually Ciri within Nilf, but still not even a mention.
Not an option to make Roche and Thaler support Dijkstra? I mean what the fuck..? Seriously, they'd prefer to fight guerilla warfare to force Emhyr to make Temeria a vassal state, than to have Dijk, who's until that point proven himself to be an effective operator, rule the North? And how the fuck would Dijkstra take over anyway???
What happens if you spare Rad but set up Ciri as empress? Does she just become a witcher still?(And stop as soon as she reaches 40 and gets fat due to lack of mutations)
Eurgh, shit makes no sense. I highly suspect they realized it would appeal more to new console players to make it into a simple hierarchy of endings, 'very good ruler > breddy good ruler>alright, i guess > hitler incarnate as KnightofPheonix said.
Wasn't not-Ciri married to Emhyr at the end of the books? I realize it was pretty common knowledge that it wasn't actually Ciri within Nilf, but still not even a mention.
Not an option to make Roche and Thaler support Dijkstra? I mean what the fuck..? Seriously, they'd prefer to fight guerilla warfare to force Emhyr to make Temeria a vassal state, than to have Dijk, who's until that point proven himself to be an effective operator, rule the North? And how the fuck would Dijkstra take over anyway???
What happens if you spare Rad but set up Ciri as empress? Does she just become a witcher still?(And stop as soon as she reaches 40 and gets fat due to lack of mutations)
Eurgh, shit makes no sense. I highly suspect they realized it would appeal more to new console players to make it into a simple hierarchy of endings, 'very good ruler > breddy good ruler>alright, i guess > hitler incarnate as KnightofPheonix said.
She can become empress only if you kill both Radovid and Djikstra, only way nilfgard to win
I'm honestly interested in why you think the Nilfgaard ending is the best, or even good? I thought all of the endings were less than ideal, and lean towards Djikstra as the best.
Nilfgaard may not be an evil empire, but they're a huge, imposing bureaucracy, and not likely to respect the culture and values of conquered states. I view it as peace, order and fairness at the cost of freedom. I have mixed feelings about Ciri as Empress. It's not terrible, but I'm not sure it's what would be best for her, or make her the happiest.
Djikstra makes the North into a formidable power, generates wealth and stability, and hurts some feelings (not counting the murder scene, obviously). The only downside is personal, because it requires Geralt to betray his friends. Horrible personal cost, but I thought the outcome was good for the North in general.
Radovid's ending is the worst, but we saw that coming the whole game. I agree that the lunacy thing felt like it came out of nowhere, but it didn't bother me that much. I could see how his past history and hatred of Phillipa could lead to some problems with obsession and vengeance. And honestly, the kings and nobility of the Witcher universe are not a group of winners. They're generally pretentious thugs with delusions of grandeur. So the insanity issue seemed to me just an exaggerated version of the flavor of the month.
Wouldn't be a problem at all if they offered a SHRED of content for people who sided with Iorveth. I mean what the fuck!!. I sided with Roche but there is NO content whatsoever. None! For those who sided with Iorveth. Or if they acknowledged the fact I let Thaler get cut down like a dog in the Vizima streets. Urgh. If they did this, it'd let you side with Dijkstra without being a complete and utter traitorous prick
It all comes down to the fact that CDPR decided(rightly so financially) they'd be more successful making a 'Skyrim'/'Wild Hunt' than 'The Elder Scrolls 5'/'The Witcher 3'.
http://images.gamersyde.com/image_the_witcher_3_wild_hunt-21365-2651_0002.jpg
http://thegamershub.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/The_Witcher_3_Wild_Hunt_New-Logo-Black1.png?w=454
Last edited:
I think it is that way because of Ciri really, even Philippa comments on that. Also Nilfgaard is just presented in a more positive light, it is the lesser of two evils(that being Redania and Nilfgaard), of course Djikstra as a ruler of the three is even better if Ciri was not in the picture.
As for Radovid, he was manipulated by Nilfgaard when it comes to blame only Philippa and the Lodge over the death of Kings, or at least it seems like that on TW 2. He was also obsessed with Philippa and was blind by his hatred, he wanted her to suffer. Radovid order her eyes taken with spoons ffs of course he is not a balanced individual. He also planed to kill Geralt in TW 2, if you try to get arrested and helped Philippa.
So in a way to me at least he was in that path already and it is no surprise in TW 3. The problem is how you do not see Radovid falling deeper and deeper into fanaticism bought by Philippa abuses during his childhood. There is no nuances in his characterization that I can see, Radovid had only one horrific side and by the end of the game I wanted him gone.
That is the problem and not really the way he does things, at one point I even though he was pretending to be a evil fanatic to appease the masses and the witch hunters but nop. Still love that Philippa got her revenge.
Last edited:
I truly believe Radovid is drunk off his ass during the chess scene. Also, take note Triss' comments about going after nonhumans next assumes that Radovid is taking the mage's money to fund the war effort rather than because Radovid hates magic.
She can't comprehend this is personal, especially because of the Lodge's actions.
I.e. it's partially her fault.
There's foreshadowing Roche has Nilfgaard sympathies.
Even with W3 being a more personal story, the politics aspect of the W3 is pretty bad. I didn't expect that coming from the same company that made W2.
Yeah me neither I can't believe its the same writers
The personal story in TW3 is quite good but how could they ruin the politics so much?
I once said that i don't want to be sucked into the politics again as in TW2, it just prevented me doing what i actually wanted to do, but that doesn't mean i don't care about politics.
I am disappointed like everyone else that the decisions from TW2 aren't really considered and that is probably understated, but i was still open for what was coming.
Then i learned that Radovid united the North under his banner, it just happened, okay, interesting, maybe they will elaborate on this later....no, they don't really.
Well, there is still this war going on, at least i thought so. I assumed that doing certain quests could move the combat area in one or another direction, in favour of the North or Nilfgaard. I was little bit blinded by all those possible world conditions they promised, but apparently the war is already over. Nilfgaard can't move their army towards the North anymore, since they have too many problems in the new conquered regions, and Radovid can't or doesn't want to drive them back yet.
Rather quickly i started to not care about it anymore, even when i met Radovid for the first time, which was a quite odd dialogue.
I understand and also really liked the focus on Geralt's & Ciri's personal story, but that doesn't mean to neglect the politics and their plausibility.
I am disappointed like everyone else that the decisions from TW2 aren't really considered and that is probably understated, but i was still open for what was coming.
Then i learned that Radovid united the North under his banner, it just happened, okay, interesting, maybe they will elaborate on this later....no, they don't really.
Well, there is still this war going on, at least i thought so. I assumed that doing certain quests could move the combat area in one or another direction, in favour of the North or Nilfgaard. I was little bit blinded by all those possible world conditions they promised, but apparently the war is already over. Nilfgaard can't move their army towards the North anymore, since they have too many problems in the new conquered regions, and Radovid can't or doesn't want to drive them back yet.
Rather quickly i started to not care about it anymore, even when i met Radovid for the first time, which was a quite odd dialogue.
I understand and also really liked the focus on Geralt's & Ciri's personal story, but that doesn't mean to neglect the politics and their plausibility.
This is what strike me as odd, there was suppose to be a war going but the only thing you really see in therms of war violence is burning and torturing woman with magic or non-humans. There is the first scene and then nothing unless it is a after thing. Well there is the last battle but that is not even about Nilfgaard or Redania. If anything the game is about taking Novigrad from under the control of the crime lords and that is it.
The game truly shines when it comes to the emotional side especially with Ciri, Geralt and Yen and if that is their solo intent, they did it with style.
When did he try to kill geralt in W2, in prision we had a chat, and Geralt ask him to help free Triss but he say, individuals are unimportant and maybe he will need bigger favor from nilfgard, then he say i got nothing against you personaly witcher but you shall not leave loc Muinne until summit is over and he leaves, leather Shilard come in and try to kill Geralt
I don't think Radovid started as unbalanced actually, I think this is all a relatively new development. I think Radovid is unable to reconcile all the horrible things he's required to do to beat Nilfgaard. As much as people like to think he's a psychopath, I think it's very likely he's not and is suffering a mental breakdown due to all the people's he's killed and atrocities he's committed.
I also believe, with no support from the game, that Radovid is probably drunk half of the times you meet him.
But in W3 game leads us to hate him, everything he does is bad, from my point of view if Radovid was the one who restores Temeria borders endings would be balanced, we could say Geralt is patriot lets support Radovid, in this state i dont se reason to do so
Radovid restoring Temeria's borders would be ludicrous because there's no reason for a King to do that unless he's insane given the Northern Kings war with each other more than Nilfgaard. Radovid creating a Northern Empire is the politically smart thing to do. You don't have to be evil to think that giving away territory when you're a monarch in need of territory to fight Nilfgaard is a stupid thing to do.
As for Radovid's emotional breakdown, I don't mind it but it wasn't explained and I am mad about that. I was hoping we'd get a reason.
That is what buggs me in W2 things he do is for reason of state, but now he is just crazy lunatic and game point us to hate him, but then i still not understand why then nilfgard restore temeria borders, as a vassal state but with own court just to stop guerilla warfare, but still have power to take novigrad and whole redania, and what about Roche he used to wear redania eagle on his clothes and now he is pro nilfgard
---------- Updated at 08:44 AM ----------
Or he keep some of that fisstech when he is dealing with salamandra in W1
Last edited: