Do we want Witcher 4 ?

+

Do we want Witcher 4 ?

  • Yes, playing as Geralt again. Can never get too much Geralt.

    Votes: 400 40.9%
  • Yes, with new predefined character, created by CD Projekt or Sapkowski.

    Votes: 243 24.9%
  • Yes, with our own custom created character.

    Votes: 172 17.6%
  • No, CD Projekt should create new IPs, new worlds. Witcher has ended.

    Votes: 162 16.6%

  • Total voters
    977
Hey, misclicked just testin to see if this is a reply or individual comment
Post automatically merged:

Dam, just did a like. whole comment that got deleted but here we go again.

Alright so I have a few points to make.

Firstly, I dont think Geralt should be the main protagonist in any more games. I think this for several reasons
--Firstly) CDPR is creatively checked out from Geralt. They've said over and over that they've stuck with him for over a decade, and it was a good trilogy, but they're ready to move on. I also think that's the most important point to make in discussing ANY character as a possible lead in the next game is CDPR's ability to be creative with their game, if they really are feeling X charecter, making a game with that charecter is going to be better than making a Game with Y charecter in it. And after TW3, we all have super high standards for the next game. Not to mention after the whole CyberPunk Launch, CDPR needs another Witcher 3 to put out. Simply saying, for that kind of game to be made, it needs to be the creative love child of the developers. With amazing story lines and even better characters. And I dont think they are going to be able to do that with Geralt. They've said over and over they feel that they're done with Geralt as a main protagonist, he was a great chapter but they're ready to move on. If they're not creatively feeling it, whatever they give out, it's going to feel dry and wont be that bar setting game we all want.
--Secondly) We know Geralt's story, how it started, ended, and everything in-between. There's a Netflix series, Game trilogy, and book series all devoted to Geralt. What other story is there to tell? The only way we can get another story from him is by getting a prequel that we already know about. And this point actually leads me into Point 3 and 3.5, which is more about why we should have a brand new character, rather than someone we already know.

---Point 3 is more angled at the reasons why we should get a new character, not just not Geralt, but not Ciri, Eskle, Vesimir, ect. The Witcher 4 is going to be a blank sheet for CDPR. Despite having several adaptations in the Witching world. They all revolve around Geralt, mainly in the Northern realms during roughly the same time period. Despite that, most of the World we dont have an in depth story in. This gives them the ability to really take a step away from the source material and obtain a whole new level of creative freedom. A level I dont think we'd get from the eyes of Ciri, Eskel, and especially Geralt.
--Point 3.5) Is that we want a Witcher 4, not a witcher 3.5, and I fear that having the player play a character from TW3, esp one that was really close to Geralt isn't going to allow the game to really stand on it's own. And while this can be fixed with Eskle and Lambert by just putting them in a different country like Kovir, or Vesimir by having it be a prequel to the Witcher Trilogy and really focusing on the Golden age of Witching. I dont see any way you can create a game that truly stands on it's own. especialy with Ciri. if the main character was the person you spent the entire previous game looking for. I feel like any game with Ciri as the main character is just going to be TW3's sequel and not it's own game.

--Point 4) (character creation) One of the really fun thing about the witcher 3,2, and 1, was getting immersed in the story of Geralt. One of the reasons we love him so much is that we've had such a long and wonderful trilogy with that character. That wont hold true if we create our own characters. I think the whole trilogy design is a good roadmap for CDPR, its enough games to truly develop the main character and the Character's they're around while not stretching their story out. I love stepping into the shoes of Geralt and I think a lot of other fans did too. If we just create our own characters I think that's going to break the immersion for alot of us. And I think keeping that trilogy road map isnt going to work if we create our own characters and their background. My biggest fear is that we see a Cyberpunk like opening, where we create our own witcher. and then we have those 3 or however many backstory choices. In Cyberpunk it was nomad, Streetkid, and Corp. in TW4 it might be "School of the Cat, octipus, ect) and I just wont feel as close to my character. Especially in game 2 and 3.
 
Last edited:
Prefer new, predefined (but still with room for us to shape and customize physically and more importantly through roleplaying) character, set beyond the Northern Realms.
 
Firstly, I dont think Geralt should be the main protagonist in any more games. I think this for several reasons
--Firstly) CDPR is creatively checked out from Geralt.
--Secondly) We know Geralt's story, how it started, ended, and everything in-between.

---Point 3 is more angled at the reasons why we should get a new character, not just not Geralt, but not Ciri, Eskle, Vesimir, ect.
--Point 3.5) Is that we want a Witcher 4, not a witcher 3.5, and I fear that having the player play a character from TW3, esp one that was really close to Geralt isn't going to allow the game to really stand on it's own. And while this can be fixed with Eskle and Lambert by just putting them in a different country like Kovir, or Vesimir by having it be a prequel to the Witcher Trilogy and really focusing on the Golden age of Witching.

--Point 4) (character creation) One of the really fun thing about the witcher 3,2, and 1, was getting immersed in the story of Geralt. One of the reasons we love him so much is that we've had such a long and wonderful trilogy with that character.
Hi!
I've been posting some ideas that partially follows your and partially don't:

I really think that Geralt still has a lot of stories to tell before he will stop working. In the last book, the ending was very open, giving the opportunity to expand the story as one wants.

I also was thinking about Lambert or Eskel adventures in post W3 world, maybe even based in W3 choices, but I also suggested an option about non-witcher MC as well.

But, of course, I was mostly writing about expanding the current W3 game (as expansion or stand-alone adventures based on similar engine), not necessarily the fully new W4.
 
Controversial (and irrelevant as they are making it anyway), but I don't find the Witcher's world in general particularly interesting. It feels derivative of other fantasy and fairytale works in a way that doesn't quite gel (in the same way that the Elder Scrolls lore feels like it was put together by thinking "wouldn't it be cool if we did X", and "we need to tick this box, that box, and that other one" rather than from a genuinely original and truly-felt idea).

What makes the game, and presumably the books, interesting is the characters.

Geralt is not returning and I would have preferred CDPR, with their considerable story talents, to create a new IP. The Witcher's world itself I just find a bit meh and have no interest in seeing again.

But of course, in the real world CDPR needs to make money to stay in business and Witcher makes money.
 
The Witcher 3 is my favorite game. I have played many games in my life, and none of them even reaches half the level of this game. The Witcher 3 has one major drawback - it ends.
When my Geralt, in the 20-someth passage, goes to the tower of Kaer Trolde castle on the way to Myszowor's laboratory with Yenifer and says "Yes, I have seen worse landscapes" and this simply crazy view opens with a panorama of the islands, with an enchanted lighthouse, with the Tower Seagulls on the horizon, I feel love, nostalgia and the strongest longing for the world of The Witcher-3.
All I would like is a worthy continuation of this game. Perhaps the world is more realistic, with an objective passage of time and the change of seasons. In which the occupations of the inhabitants would correspond to the seasons, something like the Limburg brothers showed in their "Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry". I wish creative strength and powerful inspiration to all employees CD Projekt Red who will work on the wonderful Witcher Universe in the future.

I think, Michal Janiszewski said a VERY important thought: “Creation of unique worlds should always come first. The creation of a world that has a soul has a story of its own to be told, even if few people notice it."
 
Last edited:
Ages ago I would have said I'd like Ciri as the protagonist but I think now I'd be happier making my own character. Especially if the Witcher 4 had classes to choose from so I could be Sorceress or a Witcher. I'd like more elves in the Witcher 4 though. 3 was lacking.
 
Some thoughts on the structure of time in games. In "The Witcher 3" it is absent, and this is strange. For some reason, Ciri is forever stored on the Isle of Mists like in a tin can, waiting for the player to go through all the witch's orders and play enough of huge DLS. This is implausible. The Witcher looks like the navel of the Earth around which the universe revolves - all the characters are stupidly waiting for his actions, from the entire army of Nilfgaard to every sorcerer or ruler in the game world.
The other extreme in the game "Pestilence. Utopia" - where each element of the plot looks like a reward for the fact that the player was able to hold out in the boring dull gameplay and hold out until this moment. And this is also too much - extremes are always bad, the truth is somewhere in between.
Therefore, I think that it is the tasks of the MAIN plot that should be the reward for the player for perseverance and attentiveness in exploring the world. That is, their implementation should be limited to a reasonable calendar time in the game. For example, if the player did not manage to find Ciri (or anyone) for several in-game months, then the main plot should be sent to the list of failed tasks.
All side activities - witcher orders, world exploration - on the contrary, should be available at all times, no matter how good the player is. The lead time for a witch's order should be limited, but it should start from the moment it is received.
 
Some thoughts on the structure of time in games. In "The Witcher 3" it is absent, and this is strange. For some reason, Ciri is forever stored on the Isle of Mists like in a tin can, waiting for the player to go through all the witch's orders and play enough of huge DLS. This is implausible. The Witcher looks like the navel of the Earth around which the universe revolves - all the characters are stupidly waiting for his actions, from the entire army of Nilfgaard to every sorcerer or ruler in the game world.
The other extreme in the game "Pestilence. Utopia" - where each element of the plot looks like a reward for the fact that the player was able to hold out in the boring dull gameplay and hold out until this moment. And this is also too much - extremes are always bad, the truth is somewhere in between.
Therefore, I think that it is the tasks of the MAIN plot that should be the reward for the player for perseverance and attentiveness in exploring the world. That is, their implementation should be limited to a reasonable calendar time in the game. For example, if the player did not manage to find Ciri (or anyone) for several in-game months, then the main plot should be sent to the list of failed tasks.
All side activities - witcher orders, world exploration - on the contrary, should be available at all times, no matter how good the player is. The lead time for a witch's order should be limited, but it should start from the moment it is received.
I think that would be deeply unpopular. People don't like being presented with an open world and then forced to proceed on rails because of time limits etc. Accepting that it requires some suspension of disbelief, allowing players to play things in the order they choose makes for better open world games.
 
i would really like playing as Geralt after he move in with Yennefer or Triss depending on who you romanced in the witcher 3 games and doing contracts from time to time, the most game time being spent on trying to find an antidote for yen's infertility (or triss if she has the same problem) because Geralt somehow (we all know how) discorvers the "unknown antidote" from the witcher 2 worked for him and they want to make kids.
 
I think that would be deeply unpopular. People don't like being presented with an open world and then forced to proceed on rails because of time limits etc. Accepting that it requires some suspension of disbelief, allowing players to play things in the order they choose makes for better open world games.
I think, of course, there is no need to put the whole game on rails. The excellent elaboration of the open world in The Witcher 3 suggests that it would make sense to shift the focus from the main storyline to this open world altogether. But for this it is necessary to make it more realistic - so that the occupations of the inhabitants change with the seasons and daily time. And so that there are more types of interaction with him than in The Witcher-3. The main plot, no matter how carefully the authors worked it out, in the end is suitable for one or two playthroughs (Cyberpunk2077 is another example of this). Although I replayed The Witcher 3 many times, but, of course, not because of the search for Ciri, which I got tired already of in the book cycle
 
There have been several devs that overextended themselves and made an undesirable installment of a popular series that flopped. For instance, Mass Effect while very popular, was essentially put to rest after the third game and the devs claimed they weren't going to produce additional installments. However, they later went to produce Mass Effect Andromeda, which had a terrible release and was poorly received. Frankly, I think the witcher series is very beloved and in particular, the third game seems to be the fan favorite. Many players would like to see a fourth game however, the devs should be very careful in approaching this.

I believe several things are essential to releasing a fourth installment: introducing more diversity in the form of new regions, characters, monsters, and gear; including more detail oriented game mechanics (some suggestions I've seen include cooking, fishing, mining, sailing, etc), and a riveting storyline. Frankly, Geralt is quite popular, so I believe players wouldn't mind him as the main character for the fourth series. However, character customization is really important to rpg gamers and so I'm sure many players would be interested in creating their own character. They should also remove unnecessary elements that weren't well liked. I've seen many players complain that fissech related elements don't add anything to the storyline and are basically uninteresting. I recall one mission that required Geralt to raid a fissech lab, but other than that it really doesn't add anything to the game. On the other hand, there is a quest in which your have to go to a distillery for a druid and make liquor. Frankly, something related to alcohol distillation might be a more interesting element to explore (especially since there are so many vineyards introduced by the blood and wine DLC). And lastly, they game should offer a tremendous amount of gameplay hours. They need at least 100-120 to outdo the third game, which I believe features around 90 hours of gameplay.
 
I've played just about every good RPG game ever developed from the primitive Ultima 1 in 1981 and all its subsequent games to the modern eye candy games. No matter what quality of the graphics, ALL good RPGs are story driven with engaging characters. Yes, I've played the original Baldur's Gate trilogy, the Divinity series, all of Bethesda's Elder Scroll games, all three Witchers games, the entire Dragon Age series (the first being by far the best), Neverwinter Nights series, Icewind Dale series, Diablo series; and not to be left out, Sci Fi RPGs like Deus Ex, System Shock, Fallout series, and even games like Planescape Torment and the Red Dead series (which really isn't an RPG though often listed as such). NONE of them touched me or engaged me like Witcher 3 did. It is the single best RPG on my list of all time great RPGs.

I find games like Diablo and Icewind Dale to be what us D&Ders call "hack and slash" games and they grow boring over time. Hence they are way down on my list of good RPGs. Character development, engaging story lines, side quests and story content that actually mean something and add to the atmosphere of the game world and cause immersion for us players are what keep us engaged in a game and make it memorable. Meaningless "scavenger hunt" side quests distract from the game and bump players out of immersion (at least for me). Red Dead Redemption 2 is a prime example. The game's atmosphere is well done, recreating the feel for the wild west incredibly, ... until we come to the side quests which are endless scavenger hunts that to complete requires TWO characters with the first engaging in the contract in the first chapters of the game and the second PC not even knowing about these contracts must finish many of them in the epilogue. I found that to be a game breaker for me and threw me out of immersion when I discovered that these annoying scavenger hunts couldn't be completed by the guy that started them. Hence I've never actually finished them game after finding that actiion episodes were even out of my control. I was forced to solve each situation EXACTLY how the developers wanted them solved and not strategy was allowed and no other solutions except the ones THEY wanted. Red Dead Redemption 2 was RPG at its worst. Great RPGs just don't do that. Witcher 3 did everything right and in my opinion is light years better than Red Dead Redemption 2.

I found the Witcher games' side quests to be more meaningful and engaging. They actually help the story along and weren't a lot of meaningless scavenger hunts. So many of them were almost like Easter Eggs. For example, I took an overland route with Geralt on one occasion and happened upon a man begging two men not to eat a pig they were roasting and off I went on a whole mini adventure about a whole small village turned into pigs by a curse. Finding things like that made me start wandering overland almost all the time. It is brilliant work and far more meaningful that wandering over a landscape hoping to find dinosaur bones.

But my glowing over the best RPG of all time, Witcher 3, carries with it this caveat. Like so many games, the story of Geralt is told and is over. I think of how great Baldur's Gate trilogy was, especially the Shadows of Amn, but at the end the story wraps up and there is no room for a sequel. My favorite Witcher 3 ending finds Geralt settled down on his winery with Triss, splits his time in Kovir, using her teleport abilities to instantly commute back and forth. Geralt is the first and maybe the only Witcher to live out his life and not die at the hands of a monster.

So where can the franchise go from here and should it? Answer to the last question, YES it should progress. CD Red needs to build on the roaring success of Witcher 3 (especially considering the damage to its reputation it has suffered with the Cyberpunk 2077 debacle - a game I really regret buying).

Where should it go? Is the answer to go back in time and do a prequel (like with Vesemir)? No! I would not enjoy that at all. One of my BIGGEST knocks against Red Dead Redemption 2 is that very problem ... you start the game already knowing how it HAS to end, right? The end was forced as were each step in the main quest to get to the end. You end up with the same ending no matter what you did, a choice between a bad, bad ending or a "good" bad ending. In Vesemir's case and the Witchers in general, we already know their story and what happened to them. I have ZERO desire to rehash a history i already know.

I want a NEW protagonist and a NEW problem affecting the world.

A game featuring Ciri as the main character? I LOVED her but I got the chance to play her in the interludes as we followed her story. Granted, Geralt got the most "screen time" but Ciri has her lines and her story too. The game was a split story following Geralt's AND Ciri's stories and was well done in my opinion. I only regret I didn't get to play Ciri a bit more. The truth is, witcher 3 WAS her story and her story too is over.

We are also left facing the fact Ciri is fully realized, her powers fully developed. She is a virtual goddess able to travel the planes at will from one world to another no longer pursued by the Wild Hunt threat. We saw what she could do back at Kaer Morhen when the Wild Hunt attacked in force, the battle was lost and Vesimir was killed. Her scream nearly killed everyone, including the Wild Hunt. How do we play such a powerful character and what plot would she pursue? Clearly she'll quick;y tire of being a monster slayer and the lure of other worlds will draw her to start traveling again. In the game she mentioned a technological world she was fond of, hid there for like 6 months (?) and I can't see her not going back and maybe even staying there. Isn't that the Cyberpunk world?

Ciri's story is over too. And NO, I would not be interested in a prequel with Ciri because similar to Red Dead Redemption 2 it would have us rehash the story of Ciri that has already been played out in Witcher 3. We already know the ending, even contributed to it as we played Ciri in Witcher 3 during the interludes.

My suggestion is to follow the lead from Dragon Age Origins (one of my favorite games of all time with multiple endings AND beginnings) and set a new Witcher saga in the future, with a new powerful protagonist and multiple choices for us to create a character. It is time to diverge from the books and write a completely new saga in that world setting. We could create from scratch a sorcerer or sorceress, or a Witcher and choose a race, an Elf, Dwarf, human or otherwise (Doppler - shape shifting would be complicated but fun, Gnome, Godling, etc.), both male or female. Each race has its problems and complications. Each character class also has its problems and complications, including brutal ways of getting there such as a trial of the grasses.

Protagonists could be the elder vampires (the ones no one sees, that Geralt and Regis confronted and that tore the two of them apart like they were paper bags). Though I'm sick of vampires in all things, I'd just use them as the catalyst. They've kept themselves separate because they've been working on a way to get home. They crack the veil between their world and ours, the vampires (especially the Elder ones) go "home" but the door is left open and a whole new list of VERY dire creatures leak into the world from the vampire world. Imagine how deadly monsters from the vampire world would be to compete with Vampires as powerful as Detlaff, Regis or the elder vampires and survive. I'd prefer to never see another vampire in the game, but something else that comes through that's even more powerful and malevolent. Maybe these vampires going home open the original problem that causes the reinstitution of the Witcher schools and sorcerer/sorceress schools on a mass scale.

Another possible protagonist is a misguided sorcerer or sorceress that opens or forces a crack in the spheres that allows monsters to leak back into the world from planes other than just the vampire world but this occurs later in the saga, maybe after our hero and his friends manage to close the vampire crack. It could even be a great, great grandchild of Ciri that inherited her powers but was born a psychopath, unable to feel, arrogant, power mad, gets its jollies by wielding power and seeing people grovel at its feet, enjoys the suffering or others and is exceedingly cruel. Opening the conjunction not only gives it the armies it needs to conquer ALL the worlds (and it has the power to control these creatures) but it gains more power via the crack it has opened between the planes. Maybe the closing of the vampire crack into the vampire plane is how our secret sociopath learned how to open other cracks into other planes. This sociopath could even be a friend of our PC that keeps its secrets and gets its jollies out of watching us struggle with its controlled creatures. It uses us to test its creatures for toughness versus finding our weaknesses. It could start off pretending to not be a sociopath and acts friendly, even mimics feelings but as it progresses. it secretly builds its power and its army with sorties of its forces to weaken the forces of the kings and soften them for ultimate conquest and/or corruption. All the while it adventures with our hero with us not suspecting a thing as to who the real foe is until the final reveal. It means the world needs sorcerers and sorceresses; and Witchers, to fight back. Yen knew the ritual of the grasses and chose to perform only part of it. It was clear in Witcher 3 that the technology and knowledge is not lost and only out of desperation would the Witcher schools be reopened and in desperation women taken as Witchers too. Also schools for those with promising skills in magic are opened.

We start our PC as a youngster that has to learn (i.e. develop our character from scratch) and in our class we make life long friends with fellow classmates, essentially grow up with our own Eskel and Lambert. The characters of these companions can be well developed as we get to know them as students. I'd have the mage school on one half of the campus and the Witcher schools on the other half. So growing up the mages in training learn to work with the Witchers in training. SO our new PC can even have a Triss or Yen as a companion and a friend. Again, these characters can be well rounded out, some of the non players characters can rub us the wrong way with the character traits. Lambert, for example, always seeing the world through angry eyes, always a jerk, but when you needed him to back you up, he was there.

My one big beef with Witcher 3 was that we had only one choice of who we played. Don't get me wrong, I love Geralt and enjoyed playing him in MANY MANY play throughs (had to see all the possible endings so I could pick the one I wanted for the final play through), but it did limit the game to just him and Ciri. I think it could only improve the game to open it up to let us play a PC we build from scratch and craft our own personality. We could choose to be a real jerk and the world would react appropriately. Or we could choose to be a goody goody character and the world reacts accordingly (including what friends we attract). Witcher 1 did this as I recall to a certain extent. How you treat people and how you react affected the game later on.

One minor beef with the series ... I didn't like having to learn three different gaming controls and progression trees for each game. I liked the Witcher 3 system best and if I were CD Red, I'd leave the combat system and skill tree alone for the next installment. Why keep reinventing the wheel. IF they do anything to it, improve it by making it easier to control. Where they need to spend their energy is in creating a magic system for players. I was thoroughly intrigued by some of the spells the mages cast. I was interested in Triss' anti arrow shield she put up in Flotsam in Witcher 2 or Yen's barrier she covered the entire castle at Kaer Morhen with during the battle with the Wild Hunt and I really would love to rain fire like Triss did at that battle. Being able to quick travel via teleport through those openings, so cool. Or how about Triss getting folks to talk by partially igniting them, not a "good" thing to do but it got the job done. I'm thinking a tree similar to the Witcher signs, except the spells scale to be more powerful as the sorcerer/sorceress progress in levels.

Keeping the world as it was created avoids having to rebuild it from scratch. Keeping the Witcher 3 skill tree and fighting mechanics means that doesn't have to be reinvented and we players don't have to learn yet another control/skill tree system. Seeing how the world has changed in the future would be a blast, seeing places we knew as Geralt all changed and developed into something different, i.e. familiar but different. I'd like to see the open world include all the area it currently has in Witcher 3 and add to it Temeria with a return to Vizima (the city from Witcher 1), open up Temeria including the ability to go back to Black Tern Island and the village of Murky Waters and fill in the area of Temeria (all from Witcher 1). It would also be cool to go back to the La Valette castle, off to Flotsam again, able to go to Aedirn and the city of Vergen. Maybe we could see that the Elves and Dwarves have made their own little country in Aedirn after all. A massively expanded open world using the same graphic tiles is a time saver for developers because they don't have to be reinvented again.

The other thing i'd do if they make this new version into a trilogy is to keep the same skills tree in all three games and have progression carry over from game to game. I found it very annoying and a barrier to immersion that with each Witcher game Geralt starts out essentially first level in each game. Did he forget all his progress from Witcher 2 when we reach the plot of Witcher 3? Have the characters progress slower and plateau at the end of each installment in the saga so that progress carries over from game to game. I had great weapons and armor in Witcher 2 but the carryover to Witcher 3 (imported the last save) left Geralt with inferior weapons and armor. Suddenly my great weapons and armor were crap and the migty Geralt I built was now first level again.

Better yet, create the world and just keep adding DLCs to expand it. With that mysterious force/protagonist that left a crack in barriers between worlds letting in nastier and more powerful beings. DLCs created by CD Red could theoretically go on forever (like the many fine Mods of fans for Skyrim and Fallout 4). I've never understood why developers haven't hit on the idea of building a great world and then just drown it in DLCs to keep the income flowing in and keep us players entertained for years and years. Fallout 4 came out later in 2015, the same year Witcher 3 came out and i still play Fallout 4 because of all the mods and how they can expand the game. Same thing for Skyrim and that game is a decade old but mods keep it fresh and add content, acting just like DLCs except we players get them (essentially) for free. So why not keep developers producing a line of quality DLCs that we pay for and have them expanding on the story like new chapters or books in the story?

I have a ton of ideas and plot elements.

Again, I vote for a character we build.
 
i would really like playing as Geralt after he move in with Yennefer or Triss depending on who you romanced in the witcher 3 games and doing contracts from time to time, the most game time being spent on trying to find an antidote for yen's infertility (or triss if she has the same problem) because Geralt somehow (we all know how) discorvers the "unknown antidote" from the witcher 2 worked for him and they want to make kids.
Triss has no problems with infertility, unlike Yennefer. She didn't study at Aretuza. The books mention this many times. Not all sorceresses are infertile. Example: Geralt's mother was a sorceress.
 
Last edited:
I like The Witcher Trilogy. I'm still playing the third game, there is one catch i picked up amazing weapons and amour from the second game but when i imported game saved 2 to 3 i never got his gear that he collected. As for another Witcher game with Geralt yes please.
 
I like The Witcher Trilogy. I'm still playing the third game, there is one catch i picked up amazing weapons and amour from the second game but when i imported game saved 2 to 3 i never got his gear that he collected. As for another Witcher game with Geralt yes please.
Weapons and armor are transferred only when imported from the first part to the second.
 
Top Bottom