Yeah...Maybe W1 should be renamed to The Witcher : Wild HuntI mean....this completely destroy the entire boss fight in TW3.
TW2 story is one of the best in the franchise.I played TW1, and I think that story in TW3 is on par with TW1. Yes, Eredin is better in TW1, but other than some issues with the story, especially at the end TW3 has better story (and especially compared to TW2, which IMO had worst story and atmosphere of all 3 games).
The villain is part of a bigger problem which concerns the entire Act 3 and the White Frost issue.Before that thread I never ever thought about this issue, and believe me I really love charismatic villain in movies, video games and books.
You're right encounters with Eredin could have been better but is it that much an issue? I mean even if they do 2 years of debugging and enhancement there will still be more important things to do than that IMO. Even if TW3 is the best game ever IMO there is other thing that are a total mess, the villain is just disapointing not a big deal.
Fuck Triss. Really hated that she was in the first 2 games and I was happy that I finally can get rid of her.The villain is part of a bigger problem which concerns the entire Act 3 and the White Frost issue.
In order to be worried about Ciri (which is the point of the plot) who want to kill her have to be more complex than "I'm just evil because...reasons".
But at least is a bigger issue than the lack of Triss scenes (that thread has reached 200 pages....)
How many times to people have to tell you? You should not have to read the books or play the previous games to appreciate Witcher 3. Any time people try and excuse something by pointing to EXTERNAL material, you know that the product can't stand on its own two feet.Its simple. This story is from Geralt perspective, and believe or not, Eredin didnt felt the need to explain all his motivations to him. Its up to player to link the dots together... or would you rather have him start talking like every single bad villain is in all movies and games just before he is defeated by main protagonist?
Eredin's motivation would be clear to you if you read books, and played previous games carefully.
If it was any other character I would agree, but this s Eredin Breac Glass, the main nemesis of Both Ciri and Geralt, to put it in Breaking Bad terms: He is the danger. There is no excuse, he should have had more work done to his parts in the game which I hope CDPR does eventually if they decide to.Before that thread I never ever thought about this issue, and believe me I really love charismatic villain in movies, video games and books.
You're right encounters with Eredin could have been better but is it that much an issue? I mean even if they do 2 years of debugging and enhancement there will still be more important things to do than that IMO. Even if TW3 is the best game ever IMO there is other thing that are a total mess, the villain is just disapointing not a big deal.
CDPR's writing team is not made out of idiots, they are made out of brilliant writers, but I guess they did not have enough time to flesh out the Wild Hunt that much.Some people point out that they don't understand how some dialogue and some characters can be great, while at the same time the main villain is crap. What often happens with projects like this is that different characters are written by different people, so maybe the dudes (dudets) that wrote Eridin and the hunt are just shit at their jobs?
I don't know how they are used to work, but I don't think that such important character are under the control of some shitty writers which Mr. Iwinski met and hired under a bridge.so maybe the dudes (dudets) that wrote Eridin and the hunt are just shit at their jobs?
appreciate? obviously, you don't appreciate it anyway... but knowledge of books explains a lot, you just dont like (dont understand) the story, but thats your problem. This is Witcher game, Geralt story, based on books. therefore books play important part in it. believe it or not.How many times to people have to tell you? You should not have to read the books or play the previous games to appreciate Witcher 3. Any time people try and excuse something by pointing to EXTERNAL material, you know that the product can't stand on its own two feet.
What do you not understand? It doesn't matter what the book explains or does not explain. The game is standalone and no one should be forced to rely EXTERNAL material for the story to shine. That's like excusing a Lord of the Rings movie, that only covers the epilogue, then saying "well it all makes sense if you read the books! So therefore this is an excellent film!"appreciate? obviously, you don't appreciate it anyway... but knowledge of books explains a lot, you just dont like (dont understand) the story, but thats your problem. This is Witcher game, Geralt story, based on books. therefore books play important part in it. believe it or not.
Its simple. This story is from Geralt perspective, and believe or not, Eredin didnt felt the need to explain all his motivations to him. Its up to player to link the dots together... or would you rather have him start talking like every single bad villain is in all movies and games just before he is defeated by main protagonist?
Eredin's motivation would be clear to you if you read books, and played previous games carefully.
not much to "flesh out... Eredin's intentions were set up in books quite well. He wanted to kill Ciri to prevent her offspring to destroy his world. He knew her child will be even more powerful than her, he didnt believed in Avalach's experiments, or attempts to force her to have a child with their former king. So, once he got rid of him he tried to kill her, and when she escaped, he just continued the chase. after all he was commander of Red Riders, he had all military power, nobody could challenge him..If it was any other character I would agree, but this s Eredin Breac Glass, the main nemesis of Both Ciri and Geralt, to put it in Breaking Bad terms: He is the danger. There is no excuse, he should have had more work done to his parts in the game which I hope CDPR does eventually if they decide to.
God damn I spent so much time in the last few days being an Eredin fanboy, for good reason though.
CDPR's writing team is not made out of idiots, they are made out of brilliant writers, but I guess they did not have enough time to flesh out the Wild Hunt that much.
you cannot compare Dragon age book with Witcher books... lol, books were written long before there was any plan for a PC game... W3 had to be true to the original book, they couldnt make Eredin something he was not... his intentions set in book were kept in all games - to wipe all elder blood humans, so there is no chance humans could get through the portal and attack them.Like many people who told you already, that should not be an excuse, I personally read the books and know Eredin's plans, but that is no excuse, one example to use outside the Witcher series is someone like Loghain in the Dragon Age series, his portrayal in the game did not speak of his intentions or plans or his real self like he was presented in a book that was focused on his backstory, but because he wasn't portrayed that well in the game he was a generic villain, simple as that, there is no excuse.
But that is exactly the point. The problem of TW3 is that pretend to stand on its own feet.How many times to people have to tell you? You should not have to read the books or play the previous games to appreciate Witcher 3. Any time people try and excuse something by pointing to EXTERNAL material, you know that the product can't stand on its own two feet.
Difference is, you can find all these things in W3 game directly, if you payed attention which you obviously didnt,...What do you not understand? It doesn't matter what the book explains or does not explain. The game is standalone and no one should be forced to rely EXTERNAL material for the story to shine. That's like excusing a Lord of the Rings movie, that only covers the epilogue, then saying "well it all makes sense if you read the books! So therefore this is an excellent film!"
Also, believing that the story is under-appreciated because people are too stupid to understand it, is not a convincing argument on your part.