[EPILOGUE] Ending cutscene / cinematic discussion

[Gamewidow]

if you think the "intermingling of royal blood" is pretty strange given what you know from the game ... be prepared for weirder stuff (by far!) to come in later novels

 

[username_2071380]

Incest? Indeed I was a bit amazed that a king wasn't dethroned because he slept with his sister. And moreover "the thing she gave birth to" slaughtered many innocent poeple. Maybe at that time the moral point of view was a bit different

But, who has the power to dethrone a king?

Hmm. Cromwell doesn't ring a bell? Sure, the monarchy is still around in the U.K., but figureheads aren't nearly as powerful as they once were. Still, I love the Queen, and I'd hate to see that whole romantic aspect disappear.~ Roxy

 

[petra_silie]

And... we learned already about so much corruption and betrayal in The Witcher, I'm sure there are enough monarchs, royal envier who find a way to intrigue, involve the poeple and harp on the incest... and hire an assassin ;D

 

[puumba]

Plus remember that in the real medieval and ancient world, the brother sister thing was waaayyy too common. That is what destroyed the Pharaohs of Egypt and other dynasties like the Hapsburgs. As you said of the books, if this is too strong, hang on it gets wilder. History, real history, not the watered down crap in high school, is full of incidents far wilder than most folks believe. Truth is stranger that fiction. For example, Vlad the impaler. Hero, Crusader, Murderer, and several other things. Real dude. Real bad a**. His sister was pretty bad too. Makes Foltest look good. Fought the Muslims to a stand still, saved towns from the enemy. Then sided with the enemy against a cousin that tried to back stab him. And then there is the unique crime fighting technique he had. A bit smelly, but made the point, in fact several of them. I have to side with those that see the dead mutant as a renegade witcher. For one witchers are suppose to hunt monsters, not assassinate kings. The eyes give it away, and then you have Vesemers comment that there are/were other witcher schools that no one has heard from in a while. Sounds like the making of a sequel to me, and a good one at that. Would like to see more of Vincent and Geralt kicking butt. Great team work there. Awesome game. Awesome story. Keep up the great work, and may all of you at CDProjekt RED have a Merry Christmas and a very profitable year....... 8)

 

[Corylea.723]

But, who has the power to dethrone a king?

Hmm. Cromwell doesn't ring a bell?

That happened once in a thousand years. My original point stands -- it takes unusual circumstances to dethrone a monarch; their just being unpalatable isn't usually enough.

 

[cassandra31eee]

The problem I have with the assassin being the creation of Salamandra or a Salamandra competitor is that the witchers' secrets were only stolen recently. Salamandra would have had time to mutate a person, but a mutated person is not the same as a witcher; a witcher has many, many years of training. Just having faster reflexes and quick healing doesn't turn a person into an expert swordsman, and the guy had to be pretty damned good to give our Geralt a run for his money.Witchers take children and mutate them. Is that just because children are what they get through the Law of Surprise, or do the mutations only work on people whose bodies are still in the process of forming -- i.e., children? If it's the latter, then a Salamandra kid hasn't even had time to grow up yet, after having been mutated; we don't know exactly how long Geralt's search for Salamandra lasts, but it's pretty clear that those secrets weren't stolen the ten or twenty years ago that they'd need for a kid to grow up . And remember that Salamandra was taking children in the Outskirts and that Raymond's son was taken, which suggests that Salamandra was also using kids, not adults, as the subjects of their mutation experiments.It's possible that Javed achieved some sort of breakthrough in mutation technique, where he could mutate adults. If so, he would have had to have mutated someone who was already an expert swordsman, then given that person time to re-train his body memories to work with his new reflexes and other abilities. And this breakthrough would have had to have happened quite recently, because he was still taking children while we were in the Outskirts, not so long ago.All of this suggests to me that either the witcher assassin is not from Salamandra, or if he is, he's the product of a new advance in mutation and one of very, very few to have undergone the process -- they wouldn't have had time to make very many.

Your arguments are very good pointed.Buton't forget that Alvin could travel through time and then returned as an adult (Grand Master-OK i hope we solve this at least, it's obvious! ). Who can tell us that he could not work on this (time travel) with his little dog, Azar Javed? Javed could create a successful "witcher" (or even a whole army of them) and bring them into present. Crazy theory, sure, but placed in a crazy world... ;D

 

[username_2075278]

Incest? Indeed I was a bit amazed that a king wasn't dethroned because he slept with his sister. And moreover "the thing she gave birth to" slaughtered many innocent poeple. Maybe at that time the moral point of view was a bit different

But, who has the power to dethrone a king?

Royal families committing incest has a long and respectable history, which, to one degree or another, has affected all royal families in Europe and beyond. Of course in ancient Egypt it was de rigeur; but generally, if you have blue blood and you want to guarantee your offspring's blood stays blue, you can't afford to interbreed with non-royals; and it may simply be politically too dangerous to encourage one 'noble' family at the expense of others. Keeping it in the family is convenient and safe(r).And as Cory points out all the kings in the world of the Witcher are more or less tyrants. They don't rule with the consent of the people but with the force of their (largely mercenary) armies. At least some of their people are revolting pretty much all the time. Foltest tolerates the oppression of the non-humans, and I suspect he tolerates it because so long as there's a bit of low-level geurilla war going on the people will look to a 'strong' ruler for protection. The question the merchants of Vizima are asking themselves is not 'is Foltest shagging his sister', but 'can Foltest protect us from the Soi'tael?'We aren't talking about democracies here.

 

[starfire71]

I'm not going to debate whether Alvin was or was not the grandmaster, as the original intent of this thread was to discuss the final cutscene where Geralt battles the assassin and whether not other's thought the assassin was Geralt.As to Geralt being the assassin. Not possible. The assassin does not look like Geralt at all. Possible the assassin is from one of the other Witcher schools, could be a rogue Witcher. The identity of the assassin is something we will never know unless, again the Dev's make an expansion or sequel or tell us themselves.

 

[honolululu]

The thing the puzzles me is that when you talk to Berengar he mentions that Geralt leaves his leg open at a certain point when fighting, notice this is how the assassin knocks Geralt down (why else would he mention this weakness). Berengar did work for salamandra for a while though, so he could have told them.

That's my favorite part about the end cutscene. You can see when the assassin knocks Geralt in the back, and Geralt stumbles, the assassin notices Geralt's bad leg.What does he do next? The assassin starts to press the attack up high so Geralt's knee will be exposed.Then the assassin pinpoints the just discovered weakness. Coin pouch. End of story.So I don't think the assassin knew too much about Geralt before the scene. I do think the assassin was planning to kill the king right after Geralt left so Geralt could be blamed.And oh yeah. The king looks really old. IMO this assassination attempt could be much much later in the story. I don't think 8000 orens would fit in that little bag. Do they have 100 oren pieces?

 

[Granjow]

How many times did you have to watch the cutscene until you saw that?I was wondering whether the witcher is really so stupid to attack while Geralt is in the same room. I mean, that _is_ stupid. Now I wonder whether he wanted to make the people know that Geralt was the evil witcher who has killed the king (if he had succeeded). Anyhow, the scene puts a big question mark onto the game and opens room for hope to another game with Geralt.Granjow

 

[eglard]

I do think the assassin was planning to kill the king right after Geralt left so Geralt could be blamed.

This IMO is the reason behind the assassination. I have explained my view on another thread already. The the ones who try to assassinate the king don't care of geralt that much, but they need someone to blame, and grealt is ideal for this.

 

[petra_silie]

Who then pulls the strings in the back? Is the final target the king's death or Geralt who will probably sentenced to death. I they want to get rid of Geralt why such a complicated way or... moreover they want to give him a new reputation. "The butcher of Blaviken" becomes "The murderer of Temeria's king" :hmmm:

 

[Granjow]

I think it is more possible that the other witcher just didn't want the people to know who really killed the king. Btw, did you notice how the king is standing behind Geralt at the end? Strange.Granjow

 

[maduser]

You guys have lots of profound and lovely ideas, but I think you're missing the simple things.1. How come Alvin = Grandmaster? If I were Geralt I had to trust my medallion to scream out like with the private I.2. Geralt lost his memory and couldn't remember no one before the game starts, but it looks like he and the king silently recognizing and accepting the assassin's identity.I think that:the assassin was part of the game that all of us missed(very small chance) or someone we don't need to know till the next episode.but this thread can provide lots of original ideas to the next story

 

[petra_silie]

I think that:the assassin was part of the game that all of us missed(very small chance) or someone we don't need to know till the next episode.but this thread can provide lots of original ideas to the next story

With this you bring on a new conspiracy theory :hmmm: If there is a sequel I think the assassin's assault paved the way for this new story. If the story with Alvin and the grandmaster continues, it has to be repeated as a summary in the sequel for those players who aren't in the loop. All other veterans may get bored to go through a repetition.

 

[maduser]

Any way, I think that The Witcher just broke a world record!!45 pages of people trying to understand what happened in the last scene!!This is unbelievable!!I have never seen such a thing! CD Projekt, Your the King!!! eace:

 

[petra_silie]

I have never seen such a thing!

It's because average games have an ending or at least a plausible end. This one finishes with an exciting end which we have to speculate and ponder on :hmmm: :witchmas:

 

[hamenaglar]

I have never seen such a thing!

It's because average games have an ending or at least a plausible end. This one finishes with an exciting end which we have to speculate and ponder on :hmmm: :witchmas:

I tend to disagree. A lot of games have those open endings where you simply see that the main bad guys supposedly dead body has dissapeard or he ascaped through a portal (an example would be Kotor 2). What I love about the Witcher, it's a finished game. The story is over, yet the ending movie is not the end of this adventure, but rather the beginning of another. I consider it more as a trailer for sequel rather than the end of the game.

 

[maduser]

I consider it more as a trailer for sequel rather than the end of the game.

I think you're right. It does look like an intro to the next part, how exciting

 

[petra_silie]

Okay... you both, I went over the top

There are surely other games which assume there will be a sequel.A trailer? This is daring, I consider it as a bait :witchmas: