Anyone feel that Eredin is criminally underdeveloped in W3?
I see a lot of threads complaining about other characters and/or plot-points being underdeveloped, all valid complaints I must say, but I'm shocked to see almost no one complaining about the primary antagonist being ignored. There isn't much backstory to Eredin other than what we get told from other characters and what we read in books, which would be fine for a side character, but him being the main villain I feel very strongly that his story is just as important as Geralt or Ciri's. Without a well developed villain, the story will suffer greatly and that seems to be the case here, unfortunately.
This is unacceptable in my books, and it definitely leads to that feeling we all got in the final Act that everything was 'on rails' and rushed. It also feels like he's a very 'black and white' character in what is suppose to be a morally ambiguous world. I would've gladly sacrificed development on Triss and Roche in order to get more Eredin, his screen presence in this game was so minuscule I doubt anyone would remember him a few weeks after completing the game.
What little we do see of him is awesome, however, which only reinforces my argument that there should've been more quests/side-quests featuring him. Honestly, there are throwaway characters in side-quests that are given more priority than Eredin in this game. Hopefully, future DLC can remedy this.
I don't want to turn this into a discussion about the quality of the story-telling or lack of choices, since there are already plenty of threads that cover it, but just want to highlight this so the story guys in CDPR have something to think about for their next project.
I feel like this is a great read for adopting a philosophy behind writing villains:
http://terribleminds.com/ramble/2012/07/24/25-things-you-should-know-about-antagonists/
Obviously, not all those points will apply in this case, but most do.
I see a lot of threads complaining about other characters and/or plot-points being underdeveloped, all valid complaints I must say, but I'm shocked to see almost no one complaining about the primary antagonist being ignored. There isn't much backstory to Eredin other than what we get told from other characters and what we read in books, which would be fine for a side character, but him being the main villain I feel very strongly that his story is just as important as Geralt or Ciri's. Without a well developed villain, the story will suffer greatly and that seems to be the case here, unfortunately.
This is unacceptable in my books, and it definitely leads to that feeling we all got in the final Act that everything was 'on rails' and rushed. It also feels like he's a very 'black and white' character in what is suppose to be a morally ambiguous world. I would've gladly sacrificed development on Triss and Roche in order to get more Eredin, his screen presence in this game was so minuscule I doubt anyone would remember him a few weeks after completing the game.
What little we do see of him is awesome, however, which only reinforces my argument that there should've been more quests/side-quests featuring him. Honestly, there are throwaway characters in side-quests that are given more priority than Eredin in this game. Hopefully, future DLC can remedy this.
I don't want to turn this into a discussion about the quality of the story-telling or lack of choices, since there are already plenty of threads that cover it, but just want to highlight this so the story guys in CDPR have something to think about for their next project.
I feel like this is a great read for adopting a philosophy behind writing villains:
http://terribleminds.com/ramble/2012/07/24/25-things-you-should-know-about-antagonists/
Obviously, not all those points will apply in this case, but most do.
Last edited: