Compact comiplation of the most repeated *fixable* player complaints about the story/main-quest
[Usual caveat: Withcer 3 is one of the best games I ever played, CDPR are wonderful, these issues are only upsetting to me/us because I/we love your games so damn much] [Also, ugh, unfixable typo in title]
The issue: Many players feel that the game's fiction breaks when you complete 'Reasons of State,' because completing 'Reasons of State' has no effect on the in-game world-state of Novigrad despite a build-up that specifically promises such an effect.
Why it bothers players so much: The conversation that sets up 'Reasons of State' explicitly states that Novigrad will be thrown into turmoil once King Radovid is dead. It's glaring, then, that after you kill Radovid not only is there no turmoil, but Redanian soldiers around Novigrad still casually chatter 'Long Live Radovid.' You feel like the game-designer lied to your face. The problem isn't just the coherence of the fiction, but also that this causal breakdown erodes the player's trust in the game's Choices & Consequences mechanism. The player feels like the designer just broke an explicit promise ('turmoil in Novigrad') and then added insult to injury by having all these Novigrad Redanian soldiers chatter 'Long Live Radovid' at you from every corner.
Smallest possible fix: Change the NPC chatter of Redanian soldiers after 'Reasons of State.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Issue: Many players feel that Djikstra trying to execute Roche and Ves in front of Geralt on the assumption that telling Geralt 'this doesn't concern you' is enough to dissuade Geralt from intervening is absurdly out of character for Djikstra. These players also feel that, in the most commonplace result of this scenario, Djikstra trying to beat Geralt in a sword-fight to the death rather than run away, surrender, or negotiate is so absurd that it directly ruins the game's story.
Why it bothers players so much: Djikstra's shrewdness and ability to read people are major motifs in the game. The final scene of 'Reasons of State' is so notorious because it contradicts both these central motifs:
1) Djikstra fails at really, really basic logic in assuming that Geralt will abide by some binding code of 'Witcher neutrality' literally fifteen minutes after Geralt assassinated a king. 2) Djikstra demonstrates extremely poor ability to read people in assuming that Geralt will have zero interest in preventing two dear friends (or, minimally, loyal comrades) from getting murdered on the spot. Another major motif in the game is Djikstra's flexibility or capacity to quickly adjust to new situations. This motif of Djikstra's flexibility, together with the motif of Djikstra's shrewdness and the fact that Djikstra repeatedly truthfully states that he's a subpar fighter, combine to make Djikstra's choice to sword-fight Geralt to the death a total meltdown of the game's fiction.
Smallest possible fix: Make Djikstra count on the fact that Roche and Thaler manipulated Geralt, not 'Witcher neutrality,' to dissuade Geralt from intervening. Have Djikstra argue to Geralt that Roch and Thaler used Geralt as a Nilfgaard pawn whereas Djikstra's own goals for the assassination were and are exactly what he said when he recruited Geralt. That's a more or less sane gambit, cause it's based on Geralt having both good personal reasons (resents being used; hates working for Nilfgaard) and good idealogical reasons (Djikstra will make the north thriving and modern without foreign conquest) to sit this one out. And, obviously, change the scene so that once Geralt joins the fight -- or maybe once Geralt kills all of the henchmen or attacks Djikstra directly -- Djikstra runs away, or tries to run away, or surrenders.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Issue: According to many players, the Wild Hunt, and specifically its generals, come off as 'orcs' or alternatively as 'scooby-doo villains'. They are neither threatening/mysterious, nor complex/relatable, nor charismatic/dignified.
Why it bothers players so much: Fans of the Witcher books are deeply bothered that for all you see within the game, the Wild Hunt characters they know to be sophisticated, hyper-cultured, charismatic, and destructive towards humans out of snobbery are plain dumb brutes. Fans of The Witcher I & II are deeply disappointed that the cosmic terror haunting Geralt's memories, dreams, and visions from the trilogy's first moment turns out to have been a cavalcade of special effects used by a bunch of dumb brutes to look scary. If the reality of the Red Riders is not as fascinating as the mystical pretence of the Wild Hunt was -- and the reality of the Red Riders could be fascinating through charisma or through complexity or through a different type of mystique -- then the third game is a brutal anti-climax to the trilogy.
Smallest possible fix: A good amount of extra content, or some crazy good revisions of the 12 lines that you hear from Eredin throughout the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Issue: Many players are upset about your inability to interact with a romanced Triss much, but the egregious problem is (I think) more general: your romance choices barely influence your interactions with Triss or Yen, including your interactions with Triss and Yen about romance.
Why it bothers players so much: The game deals with Geralt's romantic life *a lot*, while hardly ever reacting to Geralt's actual romance choices. This, again, makes the player feel cheated with regard to Choices & Consequences. For example, a rejected Yen will rabidly chastise Geralt for the year he spent in a relationship with Triss until six months ago, and her rant is (AFAIK) exactly the same whether Geralt stopped all romantic and sexual contact with Triss six months ago or Geralt and Triss are in a locked-in romance for life. And when Yen kisses Geralt in Kaer Morhen and Triss appears and it's all *awkward*, everything in the scene and in its short Triss aftermath plays out identically (AFAIK) whether you are in an exclusive Triss romance or an exclusive Yen romance or in a romance with both or with neither. Not being able to interact with a romanced Triss very much is one thing -- it's a massive bummer, but only Triss fans (like myself) consider it a total story breakdown --, but when the parts of the game that do concern romance are unreactive to the player's romance choice it's no longer an issue of how much romance focus the game has, but an issue of broken branching. It's especially egregious because if you romance both Triss and Yen then suddenly the game reacts ("Three to Tango"), but otherwise the game cannot be bothered.
Smallest possible fix: Write Geralt-Yen dialog, or Yen reactions, specific to exclusive Triss romance scenario, and vice versa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Issue: A good number of players are upset that 'stopping the White Frost' does not make sense according to the Witcher books' canon on what the White Frost is, or that according to the books Ciri isn't supposed to be powerful enough to do anything related to White Frost concerns.
Why it bothers players so much: First of all, it's pretty easy to miss the in-game book that explains what the White Frost is in the game's interpretation of the Witcherverse. This being said, a good number of players who didn't miss the in-game book are upset that the game doesn't bother integrating its lore-tweaking into the narrative -- e.g. as new discoveries or new possibilities or new necessities that arose since the events of the books --, which would avoid a brute retconning of the books. A good number of players are especially passionate about the topic of Ciri's power/significance, and the lack of explanation for why Avvalac'h is suddenly interested in training Ciri rather than in getting her to give birth to a child, or of why Ciri's suddenly considered powerful enough to serve Eredin's needs even though only her child or grandchild was supposed to be powerful enough, and so on.
Smallest possible fix: Probably like two lines of dialog with Avvalac'h? Geralt already has a line where he says Avvalac'h once tried to hand off Ciri like a piece of meat to produce a child, no reason Avvalac'h can't say some quick thing about realizing Ciri can be trained to a much higher power level than he and all the others have originally thought or something. Or you can put it in a letter or a note in Avvalac'hs lab, if the need for voice-acting makes new dialog prohibitively costly. Also, it can be helpful to make the in-game book that explains what the White Frost is in the game's interpretation of the Witcherverse more common or more salient.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Issue: In 'Reasons of State', Radovid says (roughly) 'I hope this time you have something more than just crystals to give me' even if you took the crystals to Triss or Yen.
Why it bothers players so much: I mean, I hope it's an actual bug and not a game design issue?
Smallest possible fix: Hopefully fixing the code, since hopefully it's a bug.
[Usual caveat: Withcer 3 is one of the best games I ever played, CDPR are wonderful, these issues are only upsetting to me/us because I/we love your games so damn much] [Also, ugh, unfixable typo in title]
The issue: Many players feel that the game's fiction breaks when you complete 'Reasons of State,' because completing 'Reasons of State' has no effect on the in-game world-state of Novigrad despite a build-up that specifically promises such an effect.
Why it bothers players so much: The conversation that sets up 'Reasons of State' explicitly states that Novigrad will be thrown into turmoil once King Radovid is dead. It's glaring, then, that after you kill Radovid not only is there no turmoil, but Redanian soldiers around Novigrad still casually chatter 'Long Live Radovid.' You feel like the game-designer lied to your face. The problem isn't just the coherence of the fiction, but also that this causal breakdown erodes the player's trust in the game's Choices & Consequences mechanism. The player feels like the designer just broke an explicit promise ('turmoil in Novigrad') and then added insult to injury by having all these Novigrad Redanian soldiers chatter 'Long Live Radovid' at you from every corner.
Smallest possible fix: Change the NPC chatter of Redanian soldiers after 'Reasons of State.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Issue: Many players feel that Djikstra trying to execute Roche and Ves in front of Geralt on the assumption that telling Geralt 'this doesn't concern you' is enough to dissuade Geralt from intervening is absurdly out of character for Djikstra. These players also feel that, in the most commonplace result of this scenario, Djikstra trying to beat Geralt in a sword-fight to the death rather than run away, surrender, or negotiate is so absurd that it directly ruins the game's story.
Why it bothers players so much: Djikstra's shrewdness and ability to read people are major motifs in the game. The final scene of 'Reasons of State' is so notorious because it contradicts both these central motifs:
1) Djikstra fails at really, really basic logic in assuming that Geralt will abide by some binding code of 'Witcher neutrality' literally fifteen minutes after Geralt assassinated a king. 2) Djikstra demonstrates extremely poor ability to read people in assuming that Geralt will have zero interest in preventing two dear friends (or, minimally, loyal comrades) from getting murdered on the spot. Another major motif in the game is Djikstra's flexibility or capacity to quickly adjust to new situations. This motif of Djikstra's flexibility, together with the motif of Djikstra's shrewdness and the fact that Djikstra repeatedly truthfully states that he's a subpar fighter, combine to make Djikstra's choice to sword-fight Geralt to the death a total meltdown of the game's fiction.
Smallest possible fix: Make Djikstra count on the fact that Roche and Thaler manipulated Geralt, not 'Witcher neutrality,' to dissuade Geralt from intervening. Have Djikstra argue to Geralt that Roch and Thaler used Geralt as a Nilfgaard pawn whereas Djikstra's own goals for the assassination were and are exactly what he said when he recruited Geralt. That's a more or less sane gambit, cause it's based on Geralt having both good personal reasons (resents being used; hates working for Nilfgaard) and good idealogical reasons (Djikstra will make the north thriving and modern without foreign conquest) to sit this one out. And, obviously, change the scene so that once Geralt joins the fight -- or maybe once Geralt kills all of the henchmen or attacks Djikstra directly -- Djikstra runs away, or tries to run away, or surrenders.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Issue: According to many players, the Wild Hunt, and specifically its generals, come off as 'orcs' or alternatively as 'scooby-doo villains'. They are neither threatening/mysterious, nor complex/relatable, nor charismatic/dignified.
Why it bothers players so much: Fans of the Witcher books are deeply bothered that for all you see within the game, the Wild Hunt characters they know to be sophisticated, hyper-cultured, charismatic, and destructive towards humans out of snobbery are plain dumb brutes. Fans of The Witcher I & II are deeply disappointed that the cosmic terror haunting Geralt's memories, dreams, and visions from the trilogy's first moment turns out to have been a cavalcade of special effects used by a bunch of dumb brutes to look scary. If the reality of the Red Riders is not as fascinating as the mystical pretence of the Wild Hunt was -- and the reality of the Red Riders could be fascinating through charisma or through complexity or through a different type of mystique -- then the third game is a brutal anti-climax to the trilogy.
Smallest possible fix: A good amount of extra content, or some crazy good revisions of the 12 lines that you hear from Eredin throughout the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Issue: Many players are upset about your inability to interact with a romanced Triss much, but the egregious problem is (I think) more general: your romance choices barely influence your interactions with Triss or Yen, including your interactions with Triss and Yen about romance.
Why it bothers players so much: The game deals with Geralt's romantic life *a lot*, while hardly ever reacting to Geralt's actual romance choices. This, again, makes the player feel cheated with regard to Choices & Consequences. For example, a rejected Yen will rabidly chastise Geralt for the year he spent in a relationship with Triss until six months ago, and her rant is (AFAIK) exactly the same whether Geralt stopped all romantic and sexual contact with Triss six months ago or Geralt and Triss are in a locked-in romance for life. And when Yen kisses Geralt in Kaer Morhen and Triss appears and it's all *awkward*, everything in the scene and in its short Triss aftermath plays out identically (AFAIK) whether you are in an exclusive Triss romance or an exclusive Yen romance or in a romance with both or with neither. Not being able to interact with a romanced Triss very much is one thing -- it's a massive bummer, but only Triss fans (like myself) consider it a total story breakdown --, but when the parts of the game that do concern romance are unreactive to the player's romance choice it's no longer an issue of how much romance focus the game has, but an issue of broken branching. It's especially egregious because if you romance both Triss and Yen then suddenly the game reacts ("Three to Tango"), but otherwise the game cannot be bothered.
Smallest possible fix: Write Geralt-Yen dialog, or Yen reactions, specific to exclusive Triss romance scenario, and vice versa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Issue: A good number of players are upset that 'stopping the White Frost' does not make sense according to the Witcher books' canon on what the White Frost is, or that according to the books Ciri isn't supposed to be powerful enough to do anything related to White Frost concerns.
Why it bothers players so much: First of all, it's pretty easy to miss the in-game book that explains what the White Frost is in the game's interpretation of the Witcherverse. This being said, a good number of players who didn't miss the in-game book are upset that the game doesn't bother integrating its lore-tweaking into the narrative -- e.g. as new discoveries or new possibilities or new necessities that arose since the events of the books --, which would avoid a brute retconning of the books. A good number of players are especially passionate about the topic of Ciri's power/significance, and the lack of explanation for why Avvalac'h is suddenly interested in training Ciri rather than in getting her to give birth to a child, or of why Ciri's suddenly considered powerful enough to serve Eredin's needs even though only her child or grandchild was supposed to be powerful enough, and so on.
Smallest possible fix: Probably like two lines of dialog with Avvalac'h? Geralt already has a line where he says Avvalac'h once tried to hand off Ciri like a piece of meat to produce a child, no reason Avvalac'h can't say some quick thing about realizing Ciri can be trained to a much higher power level than he and all the others have originally thought or something. Or you can put it in a letter or a note in Avvalac'hs lab, if the need for voice-acting makes new dialog prohibitively costly. Also, it can be helpful to make the in-game book that explains what the White Frost is in the game's interpretation of the Witcherverse more common or more salient.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Issue: In 'Reasons of State', Radovid says (roughly) 'I hope this time you have something more than just crystals to give me' even if you took the crystals to Triss or Yen.
Why it bothers players so much: I mean, I hope it's an actual bug and not a game design issue?
Smallest possible fix: Hopefully fixing the code, since hopefully it's a bug.
Last edited:
