Yeah common job for them, but there was one king who kept his word, too bad he lost his hed in W2
Yeah, it makes me think less of Roche, though. You'd think he'd have seen that coming.
I played my Geralt as a crusty cynic throughout the game, and 90% of his suspicions ended up coming true by the end... including telling Roche that he was going to get shafted by Emhyr. Actually the only one I can recall him being wrong about was Avallac'h, but it was only semi-wrong because Avallac'h is still a shithead. Just not as big a shithead as initially suspected.
And Temeria becomes a semi-independent vassal either way, so maybe Roche was still satisfied. Incidentally, I think Thaler's quote about the situation is one of the best in the game:
"The Silver Lilies will bloom 'neath the rays of the Great Sun... so I'd say were I a poet. But I'm not, so all I'll say is there was no other fuckin' way."
And Temeria becomes a semi-independent vassal either way, so maybe Roche was still satisfied. Incidentally, I think Thaler's quote about the situation is one of the best in the game:
"The Silver Lilies will bloom 'neath the rays of the Great Sun... so I'd say were I a poet. But I'm not, so all I'll say is there was no other fuckin' way."
Last edited:
If they do an Enhanced Edition, I'd like to hear Ves' opinion on this given her mission is to prevent Nilfgaard from doing a massacre of a town.
Is she okay with this?
If so, it's cool, but you'd think she'd get some commentary.
The more i think about it, the more i think Nilfgaard winning being the good option serves as a resolution for the plot. The 3rd game is basically the last books of the Witcher Saga rewritten. We have again
1)Geralt searching for Ciri
2)Ciri running away from the Wild Hunt
3)A war between the Empire and the Northern Kingdoms
4) Emhyr is searching for Ciri
with some differences.
1)Geralt this time around works with Emhyr, since Emhyr, while again tries to find Ciri does not have the ill motives he had in the books. This is understandable cause he dropped these plans in the final pages of the final book
2)This time sorceresses support Nilfgaard
3) The lodge is in decline and basically non existent, compared to the books where it was all mighty
And then we come to the ending of the books and this game. The books do not give resolution on ANYTHING, possibly because Sapkowsky wantedto leave them open to revisit them later, and continue the story. In the books
1)North wins the war, but there are still problems, regading racial tensions and the relationship between the Kingdoms. Nilfgaard settled up to Cintra and waits to possibly strike again(as it did in the games)
2)Geralt and Yeniffer sort of die, but not really/ Ciri moves them somewhere, and we do not really know what happened to them
3)Ciri flees the world and we do not know what became of her.
The wild wunt game basically rewrites the story, but this time brings it to a conclusion by(talking about the "good" ending):
1)Nilfgaard wins the war and finally there is political stability
2) Ciri becomes the empress which helps. It is not mentioned in the game, but Ciri is also the rightful ruller of Cintra and Skellige(which is a vassal state of Cintra). She also has Elven blood which makes her easier to accept by the Elder Races and generally she is a more liked figure in the North than Emhyr. The North would not accept Emhyr in the long run, but they would accept Ciri. I wonder why they did not mention this.
3) Geralt ends up with Yennifer in what he admitted in the books that was his long time dream. Yennefer hated it though, i find it amusing that she changed her mind. She was even the one that proposed it
1)Geralt searching for Ciri
2)Ciri running away from the Wild Hunt
3)A war between the Empire and the Northern Kingdoms
4) Emhyr is searching for Ciri
with some differences.
1)Geralt this time around works with Emhyr, since Emhyr, while again tries to find Ciri does not have the ill motives he had in the books. This is understandable cause he dropped these plans in the final pages of the final book
2)This time sorceresses support Nilfgaard
3) The lodge is in decline and basically non existent, compared to the books where it was all mighty
And then we come to the ending of the books and this game. The books do not give resolution on ANYTHING, possibly because Sapkowsky wantedto leave them open to revisit them later, and continue the story. In the books
1)North wins the war, but there are still problems, regading racial tensions and the relationship between the Kingdoms. Nilfgaard settled up to Cintra and waits to possibly strike again(as it did in the games)
2)Geralt and Yeniffer sort of die, but not really/ Ciri moves them somewhere, and we do not really know what happened to them
3)Ciri flees the world and we do not know what became of her.
The wild wunt game basically rewrites the story, but this time brings it to a conclusion by(talking about the "good" ending):
1)Nilfgaard wins the war and finally there is political stability
2) Ciri becomes the empress which helps. It is not mentioned in the game, but Ciri is also the rightful ruller of Cintra and Skellige(which is a vassal state of Cintra). She also has Elven blood which makes her easier to accept by the Elder Races and generally she is a more liked figure in the North than Emhyr. The North would not accept Emhyr in the long run, but they would accept Ciri. I wonder why they did not mention this.
3) Geralt ends up with Yennifer in what he admitted in the books that was his long time dream. Yennefer hated it though, i find it amusing that she changed her mind. She was even the one that proposed it
I think Ciri as Empress, Nilfgaard winning the North, and Geralt retiring is pretty much the equivalent of rewriting the Star Wars trilogy to have Luke join the Empire and become a Sith Lord who reforms the galaxy and makes it a heroic state.
It inverts the themes of the books which is that Ciri's freedom is paramount, that the North is flawed but deserves to be free, and that Geralt is a force for good no matter how much he tries to be neutral.
Why he dies ending a pogrom.
Then again, I may feel this way as I think the North is an awesome setting as is and making it part of Nilfgaard more or less "ruins" the Witcher feel.
What need is there for a Witcher with "infinite legions of soldiers" to defeat monsters? Geralt is flat-out confused when the Nilfgaard commander hires him to kill the Griffin because they have a massive modernized army.
It inverts the themes of the books which is that Ciri's freedom is paramount, that the North is flawed but deserves to be free, and that Geralt is a force for good no matter how much he tries to be neutral.
Why he dies ending a pogrom.
Then again, I may feel this way as I think the North is an awesome setting as is and making it part of Nilfgaard more or less "ruins" the Witcher feel.
What need is there for a Witcher with "infinite legions of soldiers" to defeat monsters? Geralt is flat-out confused when the Nilfgaard commander hires him to kill the Griffin because they have a massive modernized army.
Last edited:
The resolution was definetely dumbed down and simplified. Geralt never really succeeds in staying neutral, but he is mostly acting to save his close ones rather that taking a political stance. One of the best passages of Times of Contempt is when he takes Ciri to the elven ruins, explaining to her why he would not fight the Scoiatel, and how they are nesceserily bad, and 5 minutes later he is forced to fight and kill them, because Ciri and Triss are in danger.
To be fair, also, Geralt being forced to take a political stance is more or less the entire theme of the Witcher 1 and 2. The fact he DOESN'T in the Wild Hunt is a subversion.
But he didn't.
The agreement between Roche and Emhyr was that Temeria would become a vassal state and that's exactly what happens in that ending.
The original agreement included Dijkstra as well, likely taking over Redania which would remain free and keep Kaedwen but with Dijkstra dead there's no one left to take over Redania and make it stand down let alone have it agree to those terms, and Roche doesn't give a spit about Redania.
But that's why the games aren't the books. Trying to view the situation from the same lens is a waste of time.
You also equate Geralt helping Roche kill Radovid, a mass murderer, then not standing aside when Dijkstra wants to kill his friends and set up a totalitarian state as "evil". Which is nonsense.
Last edited:
The agreement is that the war would END as explained by Roche with Lyria and Aedirn limited plus a cessation of Nilfgaard aggression. The ending is all about how Nilfgaard is continuing to prosecute the war on every other front.
Also, Temeria only gets its independence from continued guerrilla efforts.
In short, the Emperor doesn't even honor the vassal state agreement without coercion.
I'm just going by what's said, though you raise a good point about Redania.
Well without Dijkstra to make Redania stand down then how would it? Niflgaard was always going to keep every other realm it conquered.
What nonsense are you spouting here?
The so called concession occurred before the assassination with Emhyr agreeing to leave Temeria if they stand down and that's exactly what happened, trying to claim that Emhyr didn't honor his agreement has no basis.
That might be the case or might not, it's just speculation, though.
Have you seen the Nilfgaard wins ending? Serious question. Temeria wins its independence as a vassal state of Nilfgaard through continued guerilla warfare.
It's a nicely ambiguous ending, happy for Temeria and sucks for everyone else but the ending is very clear the fighting doesn't stop with the assassination.
Last edited:
What? Both sides stop fighting once they sign a truce. Why do you think Emhyr did not honor his word?
Because the Nilfgaard wins ending talks about how Temeria wins its independence through guerilla fighting and that frees up Nilfgaard's troops to continue fighting elsewhere.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MJXAyNNXaM
It starts at 1:57.
"Weary of Rebel Raids, Emhyr conceded, restoring Temeria as a realm in liege to the Empire. When the guerilla laid down their arms, the Emperor shifted his forces to other fronts."
It's still a happy ending but Roche obviously still has to do some fighting after the assassination because Emhyr is a lying bastard.
But we knew that.
You are mistaken. Emhyr was weary of Roche's resistance, therefore he offered him a truce. They signed a truce and Emhyr sent his troops to Redania. That's what they are talking about in this ending. Emhyr honored his word.
You must really hate Emhyr given how you accuse him without any evidence.
That's one way to read it.
I don't choose to read it that way. I'm sorry you can't see my perspective.
Yes, I do hate Book Emhyr but not Game Emhyr.