The lack of presence of the Wild Hunt gives me the most hope they will adddress this issue. The problems with the politics for example are too deep and can't be fixed without rewriting parts of the story and some of the characters (Radovid being the most obvous one). It's very unlikely they will do that.
As opposed to this most problems with the Wild Hunt can be fixed with just adding new content.. A playabable Tir Na Lia flashback could solve most problems with the lack of characterization of the Wld Hunt, Eredin, Aen Elle and the lack of explanation regarding the Whie Frost. We are talking about one mission with maybe 30 minutes of new content. Nothing they haven't done before with the enhanced editions of the previous games.
Guess we'll have to wait & see...although I suspect it's going to be at least another 6 months down the road when & IF we might get something on this...for now, I'm somewhat satisfied with having got a reply from CDPR on said topic. Time will tell if they do this justice...was actually going through the IGN review of W3 and honestly they were right...the main story does fall short (because of most of the reasons people have posted around here) ...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpevTNRK-_M ..just check the description of the video....sooooo goood..the same f**kin' question I asked myself when the credits started rolling in after the epliogue!!!
Last edited:
Game about the Wild Hunt with nearly Zero Wild Hunt Content..
And what is included in the game has been poorly implemented...
And this Video looked so promising....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZbNiHMrHzI
0:00-0:45
Good times....
And what is included in the game has been poorly implemented...
And this Video looked so promising....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZbNiHMrHzI
0:00-0:45
Good times....
Last edited:
When Eriden fight with Geralt, they also said one lines about: He want to kill *Ciri name in elves language* quick, but now see thing like this, he will do it slower. So we can count he has 13 lines ...
And here I thought Bioware was be the true king of cheesy one-liners... But Eredin beats every Bioware character right out of the park.
Definitely the new reference for cheesy one-liners in RPGs! I guess CDPR wanted to prove that they can even beat Bioware on the their home turf...
:victory:
Definitely the new reference for cheesy one-liners in RPGs! I guess CDPR wanted to prove that they can even beat Bioware on the their home turf...
:victory:
If we compare the Witcher 3 to the Witcher 2 antagonist. Is there actually anything "better" about Eredin than Letho?
Letho and his witcher buddies felt more like a threat althought they were only 4, while the Wild Hunt is a full military unit. Probably because Letho actually achieves something. He kills 2 kings and spreads chaos on the North, while Eredin fails over and over again. He fails to convince Ciri to poison the Aen Elle king. He fails to prevent her escaping out of Tir Na Lia. He fails to capture her during the 6+ years, he chases her. He fails to capture her at Kaer Morhen and Skellige, only to get killed shortly after. His only "victory" was Imlerith killing Vesemir.
Letho is physically stronger. Both gameplay- and storywise. The fight against him in the elven ruins is much more difficult than the fight against Eredin at the end of Witcher 3 and Geralt is defeated by him while we always defeat Eredin in the only fight we have with him.
Letho is more cunning. He outsmarts Geralt while killng Foltest. He outsmarts Iorveth, Phillipa and Sile and all 3 of them are considered to be smart as well.
Eredin on the other hand does nothing worth mentioning.
Furthermore Letho is a omnipresent during the story. While we barely meet him we know most of the time what's going on with him, smartly told via conversations, narrations, flashbacks and short encounters. We only meet Letho 3 times (just like Eredin) but because we actually have northworthy interactions with him and we see Letho having interactions with others (Iorveth, Serrit, Auckes) we get the chance to get a deeper look at him.
Both have a personal connection with Geralt established before the events of the games, but while the history between Letho/Geralt is used as a tool to give the antagonist more depth, the history between Eredin and Geralt doesn't play any role.
Maybe their motives differ? Both have basically the same aims. To ensure the continued existence of their "kind" (Aen Elle in Eredins case and Witchers of the Viper School in Letho's case). I don't see much difference. The motives of both are not very convincing given their actions. I would even say Letho's motives are more credible as he got captured by Nilfgaard and was maybe even forced to work for them.
Eredin is no grey character like Letho. He is a clearly characterized as evil. We are not supposed to sympathize with him. That's fine. But then he has to have other traits.
Vilgefortz for example wasn't a grey character as well. But he still worked for me as the antagonist, because he was threatening. He was at least powerful.
Not even that can be said about Eredin. I don't want him to be physically over the top powerful. That's not how he is supposed to be. I want him to be a threat because of this role as the king of a powerful race, who has access to the military forces of this race. But unfortunately even as the leader of the Red Riders he almost never felt like a real threat. Most of the time he and his Riders attacked simple villages without any defense. The only time they actually ecountered resistence they got defeated. (though the problem in this case were the over the top powers of Ciri)
For me personally Letho is the better antagonist in every possible way by a wide margin.
Letho and his witcher buddies felt more like a threat althought they were only 4, while the Wild Hunt is a full military unit. Probably because Letho actually achieves something. He kills 2 kings and spreads chaos on the North, while Eredin fails over and over again. He fails to convince Ciri to poison the Aen Elle king. He fails to prevent her escaping out of Tir Na Lia. He fails to capture her during the 6+ years, he chases her. He fails to capture her at Kaer Morhen and Skellige, only to get killed shortly after. His only "victory" was Imlerith killing Vesemir.
Letho is physically stronger. Both gameplay- and storywise. The fight against him in the elven ruins is much more difficult than the fight against Eredin at the end of Witcher 3 and Geralt is defeated by him while we always defeat Eredin in the only fight we have with him.
Letho is more cunning. He outsmarts Geralt while killng Foltest. He outsmarts Iorveth, Phillipa and Sile and all 3 of them are considered to be smart as well.
Eredin on the other hand does nothing worth mentioning.
Furthermore Letho is a omnipresent during the story. While we barely meet him we know most of the time what's going on with him, smartly told via conversations, narrations, flashbacks and short encounters. We only meet Letho 3 times (just like Eredin) but because we actually have northworthy interactions with him and we see Letho having interactions with others (Iorveth, Serrit, Auckes) we get the chance to get a deeper look at him.
Both have a personal connection with Geralt established before the events of the games, but while the history between Letho/Geralt is used as a tool to give the antagonist more depth, the history between Eredin and Geralt doesn't play any role.
Maybe their motives differ? Both have basically the same aims. To ensure the continued existence of their "kind" (Aen Elle in Eredins case and Witchers of the Viper School in Letho's case). I don't see much difference. The motives of both are not very convincing given their actions. I would even say Letho's motives are more credible as he got captured by Nilfgaard and was maybe even forced to work for them.
Eredin is no grey character like Letho. He is a clearly characterized as evil. We are not supposed to sympathize with him. That's fine. But then he has to have other traits.
Vilgefortz for example wasn't a grey character as well. But he still worked for me as the antagonist, because he was threatening. He was at least powerful.
Not even that can be said about Eredin. I don't want him to be physically over the top powerful. That's not how he is supposed to be. I want him to be a threat because of this role as the king of a powerful race, who has access to the military forces of this race. But unfortunately even as the leader of the Red Riders he almost never felt like a real threat. Most of the time he and his Riders attacked simple villages without any defense. The only time they actually ecountered resistence they got defeated. (though the problem in this case were the over the top powers of Ciri)
For me personally Letho is the better antagonist in every possible way by a wide margin.
Last edited:
LOL, it brings back memories about DAI's Corypheus, whose efforts were thwarted by the inquisitor at every steps, and never even attempted to fight back and do some sabotages of his own. The only time he kind of "won" was when he destroyed Haven, but then by showing his face as the ultimate evil (the darkspawn magister), he actually empowered the inquisition, so the victory was more harm than good.
I think by dumbing down the villains one also dumbs down the heroes. And such villains and Mary Sue hero like the game!Ciri just felt so unrealistic it sometimes completely broke the immersion for me. Where are the twists and turns(one that actually make sense in hindsight) and the sense of achievement?
Last edited:
I'd actually disagree. Corypheus did try and fight back and wasn't merely reacting to the Inquisition. He caused that massive hole in the Sky, recruits either Templars or Mages, plans an assassination ( that can actually be successful ) and thoroughly manipulated the Grey Wardens. You were reacting to these things and working to fix them, mostly succeeding but not fully.
Of course this isn't like with Letho, Letho achieved EVERYTHING he wanted: The North in chaos, the Lodge blamed for the regicides, the remaining kingdoms at each other's throat.
What made Corypheus better then Eredin is that Corypheus was an ever present force, that he was active in the fight against you instead of buggering off after that chase at Vizima and doing fuck all until Kaer Morhen.
yep Eredin and The Wild Hunt characters are definitely suffer as a lamest villains in Witcher series. I could have swore in this game a completely new character like Ge'el have more dialogues and deeper characterization than the so called King of The Wild Hunt, the arch nemesis of Geralt and Ciri. there is definitely something fishy here. I have no problem with Imrelith just as a simple brute and sex deviant, Caranthir as wounded faceless mage, but Eredin is a whole another story.
I don't know this is just my wild guess, maybe the main storyline should be in 4 acts (with Act 1 finding Ciri, Act 2 Battle of Kaer Morhen, Act 3 killing Eredin Generals (Imrelith, Caranthir, or maybe Ge'el too) to reduce their manpowers, and finally act 4 killing Eredin and a deeper White frost plotline) + an epilogue act but unfortunately CDPR somehow cut it out for unknown reasons and it's pretty much suffer the main storyline as a legendary story.
I can only hope that CDPR will addressed and fix it with EE edition just like the Witcher 2.
I don't know this is just my wild guess, maybe the main storyline should be in 4 acts (with Act 1 finding Ciri, Act 2 Battle of Kaer Morhen, Act 3 killing Eredin Generals (Imrelith, Caranthir, or maybe Ge'el too) to reduce their manpowers, and finally act 4 killing Eredin and a deeper White frost plotline) + an epilogue act but unfortunately CDPR somehow cut it out for unknown reasons and it's pretty much suffer the main storyline as a legendary story.
I can only hope that CDPR will addressed and fix it with EE edition just like the Witcher 2.
And....they should made some scenes more darker, like the Witches Sabbath.
This might be true too.
I imagine the witches sabbath somehow like a cult sabbath chapter in Berserk manga (definitely recommended this). It was very awkward feelings that you can't stomach it easily . There was a very dark, sensual, gory, and terrifying feelings all at the same time. But turns out I was disappointed by it, maybe because this has become more of a streamline game and this kind of things could be controversial.
Rockstar makes very controversial streamline games, and they sell pretty well.
Eredin did not need to be a sympathetic villain, but him and his generals needed more screen time. From the trailers, I was expecting a game in which we'd be hunting Ciri and and the Hunt would be hunting us at the same time. I expected a higher volume of battles, fighting the Hunt and Eredin's different generals at frequent points in the game, and maybe even have some side quests related to them.
Eredin was a pretty interesting character, despite being mysterious, in TW1 and was a constant presence throughout the story. In TW2 we learned more about him and he seemed like a terrifying presence. In TW3 I was expecting to learn more about him, and his personality, but what we got was the potential for a good villain which was sadly wasted. Eredin and Act 3 are the big things that need to be improved in an Enhanced Edition of the game.
Eredin was a pretty interesting character, despite being mysterious, in TW1 and was a constant presence throughout the story. In TW2 we learned more about him and he seemed like a terrifying presence. In TW3 I was expecting to learn more about him, and his personality, but what we got was the potential for a good villain which was sadly wasted. Eredin and Act 3 are the big things that need to be improved in an Enhanced Edition of the game.