Found Triss after six months, but she says we're only friends? What...?

[Aelius28]

Found Triss after six months, but she says we're only friends? What...?

I'm using a save file from The Witcher 2 where every choice I made vis-a-vis Triss was romantic. Yet I just came upon her in Novigrad for the first time and throughout our initial walk around the city (doing the rat job) she and Geralt kept saying things like "We agreed to just be friends" (uhh, no?) or "I was afraid there'd be bad blood between us" (uhh, why?) and even the journal entry for her character says that we broke off our relationship (uhh, what the hell? No we sodding didn't.)

What the hell is going on here?

(Also, despite the section I had to post this in, please keep any answers spoiler-free regarding anything I haven't gotten to yet in the game.)

 

[dragonbird]

There's nothing really to tell here. You split up during that six month gap, and the game is playing out as it does by design. There's a fair number of threads here discussing this design choice, but I recommend you don't read them until you get further, as they will include spoilers.

(And I'd like to request that nobody DOES spoil this thread, or you may feel the wrath of the dragon. Aelius28 can be pointed to those other threads, which he can go to later.)

 

[Garrison72]

What the hell is going on here?

Get used to saying that if you expect a direct sequel.

In short: TW3 is not a direct sequel, it's a stand alone title done in the spirit of Spakowski's work. Little from TW2 is taken into account. That includes all major characters, world state and politics.

 

[Aelius28]

There's nothing really to tell here. You split up during that six month gap, and the game is playing out as it does by design. There's a fair number of threads here discussing about this design choice, but I recommend you don't read them until you get further, as they will include spoilers.

(And I'd like to request that nobody DOES spoil this thread. Aelius28 can be pointed to those other threads, which he can go to later.)

How many people do you know break up with their romantic partner because of, say, a six month long business trip?

That makes no damn sense.

Why did they split up? That has yet to be explained to me. It's like the game which prides itself so much on decisions and their consequences not only doesn't give a damn what I chose in the last game but seems to pretend like there wasn't even a choice to begin with. It just assumes everyone is on board with them having broken up. It's as if the devs were under the impression that the only choice you could make in The Witcher 2 as it pertains to Triss was to not be into her. Did they forget their own game?

For that matter, why are mages being persecuted? I restored the Conclave in the second game. I did not choose the ending that resulted in the mass execution of mages. So why are they all being persecuted as if that's what I chose?

I'm so furious I almost don't want to continue on to the point where I could read some of these other threads that might squeeze some sense out of this insanity.

---------- Post merged on 18-04-2016 at 12:00 AM ----------

Get used to saying that if you expect a direct sequel.

In short: TW3 is not a direct sequel, it's a stand alone title done in the spirit of Spakowski's work. Little from TW2 is taken into account. That includes all major characters, world state and politics.

1) Then why can you import a save game??

2) If what you say is true, then where is that ever made clear? Because no reasonable person would ever suppose that this game is a standalone sequel that doesn't directly follow from the previous game, especially given the option to import a savegame from TW2. If no continuity was their intent, surely they made that clear somewhere. Where?

3) If what you say is true, then why do some decisions in TW2 savegame import carry through?

4) Even if what you say is true, that seems like a really weaksauce excuse to avoid going to the trouble of having to establish continuity, especially after giving the option to import a save from the previous game. To offer to import a save and then disregard many things in that save is just insulting.

 

[dragonbird]

OK. Well, in that case @Garrison72 or @Gilthoniel, as you're around, go ahead with a more detailed explanation. Mine would be biased the wrong way.

 

[Garrison72]

That seems like a really weaksauce excuse to avoid having to establish continuity, especially since it gives you the option to import a save from the previous game. To offer to import a save and then disregard anything in that save is just insulting.

It's still an amazing game and captures much of what made the previous games great. It does open world really well too. You should play it and enjoy it. But for reasons unknown, the devs payed little heed to plot and character consistency and you should be forewarned. Import saves are really hard to do and CDPR made it pretty clear they weren't going to mean much. And yes, this has been discussed to death so I'll drop it here. But I would never tell anyone to not play it because of this.

 

[Aelius28]

It's still an amazing game and captures much of what the previous games great. It does open world really well too.

Not what we're discussing.

You should play it and enjoy it.

Kind of hard to now...

But for reasons unknown, the devs payed little heed to plot and character consistency and you should be forewarned.

Reasons unknown indeed.

Import saves are really hard to do and CDPR made it pretty clear they weren't going to do much.

I followed this game's development closely and failed to encounter any such statement from the devs.

And yes, this has been discussed to death so I'll drop it here.

Err, why? You may have discussed it to death and others may have, but I haven't seen those discussions and I can't because they all contain spoilers...

But if you don't want to talk about this any more, that's obviously up to you, but I don't understand why you seem to think the existence of other discussions on this topic negates my need for an explanation - I cannot read those other discussions.

But I would never tell anyone to not play it because of this.

Speak for yourself.

Edit: sorry, to be clear, I'm not mad at you and I don't mean to spill my fury about this onto you.

 

[dragonbird]

OK. Trying without too much spoilers...

At the end of TW2, there are two "givens". 1. Nilfgaard has just invaded the North, which negates all of the political outcomes from your actions in the game. 2. You've found out about Yen and are going to go looking for her. You will also be "with" Triss, who you may or may not be in love with. By book canon, you will also be "bound" to Yen, because of a spell cast by a djinn. The apologist version (which I subscribe to) is that this means you with EITHER be in love with Just Yen, or be in love with both Triss and Yen and therefore conflicted.

Very minor spoiler, safe to read I think:

Spoiler

About a week later, you and Triss split up. The reason for this isn't explained in the game, it's left to you to decide in your own mind why. It's also never stated who decided to end it, or if it was mutual, but it is made clear that there was a "Let's Stay Friends" moment and that Triss, who definitely loves Geralt, is hurt but doing the "right thing" and trying to move on.

Slightly bigger spoiler, but it may make you feel better. You may already know this anyway:

Spoiler

The game does give you the opportunity to acknowledge that splitting up was a mistake, and to get back with Triss.

 

[Aelius28]

OK. Trying without too much spoilers...

At the end of TW2, there are two "givens". 1. Nilfgaard has just invaded the North, which negates all of the political outcomes from your actions in the game. 2. You've found out about Yen and are going to go looking for her. You will also be "with" Triss, who you may or may not be in love with. By book canon, you will also be "bound" to Yen, because of a spell cast by a djinn. The apologist version (which I subscribe to) is that this means you with EITHER be in love with Just Yen, or be in love with both Triss and Yen and therefore conflicted.

Very minor spoiler, safe to read I think:

Spoiler

About a week later, you and Triss split up. The reason for this isn't explained in the game, it's left to you to decide in your own mind why. It's also never stated who decided to end it, or if it was mutual, but it is made clear that there was a "Let's Stay Friends" moment and that Triss, who definitely loves Geralt, is hurt but doing the "right thing" and trying to move on.

Slightly bigger spoiler, but it may make you feel better. You may already know this anyway:

Spoiler

The game does give you the opportunity to acknowledge that splitting up was a mistake, and to get back with Triss.

Alright, thanks a lot. That does make me feel better. This whole time I've had TW3 in the background so I think now I'll alt-tab back into the rat-infested granary and continue on!

I have a tendency to overreact to disappointment and feel devastated (such as in one of my threads a few weeks ago about the geographic scale of Velen) but I tend to get past it.

But before I go, there's one other thing that I'm also confused about. What's the explanation for why mages are being persecuted in TW3? One of the endings of TW2 results in the city hunting the mages and executing them all right then and there in Loc Muinne, which would explain why that's also happening now in TW3, but one of the endings does not cause that to happen. In that ending (in which the Conclave was said to be intended to be restored) the mages do not get hunted down and slaughtered in Loc Muinne. That's the ending I chose, and so I thought it was rather weird that all the sudden mages are being persecuted after all

 

[Riven-Twain]

Err, why? You may have discussed it to death and others may have, but I haven't seen those discussions and I can't because they all contain spoilers...

It has been discussed 'to death' because it is a sore spot, and a source of significant dissatisfaction amongst many players. The ultimate grounds for the separation, and various other shortcomings of the save-import, are left to the imagination of the individual. Unfortunately, there is no exhaustive official explanation for the inconsistencies, as @Dragonbird has indicated, beyond the fact that The Witcher III was intended as a predominantly self-contained game, which the developers imbued with a certain amount of 'independence' from the previous instalments in the series, in order to stand upon its own merits. Naturally, many returning players have not been much pleased with this design choice, and the results have been many elaborate and aggressive, impassioned criticisms.

 

[Aelius28]

It has been discussed 'to death' because it is a sore spot, and a source of significant dissatisfaction amongst many players. The ultimate grounds for the separation, and various other shortcomings of the save-import, are left to the imagination of the individual. Unfortunately, there is no exhaustive official explanation for the inconsistencies, as @Dragonbird has indicated, beyond the fact that The Witcher III was intended as a predominantly self-contained game, which the developers imbued with a certain amount of 'independence' from the previous instalments in the series, in order to stand upon its own merits. Naturally, many returning players have not been much pleased with this design choice, and the results have been many elaborate and aggressive, impassioned criticisms.

Hmm, what are some other story elements that don't follow from decisions that could have been made in TW2? No major spoilers, if you please, but minor ones are fine by me, or even just pointing out which particular choice in TW2 doesn't follow through in TW3. I'd just... I'd rather not be surprised again in the future and feel devastated again, so if at all possible I'd like to know in advance.

 

[skylineR390]

Dear Aelius28, I feel bad for you because, in you, I see myself 10 months ago. I'm sorry to tell you this, but you are in for a big disappointment.

Here's what you need to know:
The developers decided to start this game with a clean slate. Very little, if any, of the choices you made in the previous games have a significant effect in this game. The reason why, only they know. Maybe because they didn't want or couldn't dedicate extra development time to properly integrate crucial game choices from previous games. Maybe they knew only a small portion of their potential player base would care enough -basically the veteran players- Or maybe they didn't want to complicate an already complicated game with more branches and choices to code. Maybe they had too much on their plate. Maybe the powers that be decided that it wasn't important; and who knows perhaps they were right, the game sold very well after all. In any case, whatever the reason was, it doesn't matter now. The game is finished and there's nothing we can do about it.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to defend them. If you look at my posts you will see I'm their biggest critic. And because I love the game so much I'm always ready to point all the things they've done wrong. This being one of the least important.

Much worse is the way they handled the whole relationship with Triss. Though I hear Jen fans are not too happy either, the Triss content was so little and ended so abruptly, even they had to recognize it and release a patch adding a few more lines of dialogue and giving the whole relationship better closure.So I suggest you take it easy and enjoy what little content you have with her.

To give credit were credit is due, the content might be short but it is very well done. I still can evoke the last scene you two have at the docks and all these feelings of longing and wistfulness resurface. I remember it vividly, Don't want to spoil anything; just know that there will be worthwhile moments.

 

[Riven-Twain]

Hmm, what are some other story elements that don't follow from decisions that could have been made in TW2?

Honestly, and without spoilers, most of them. This is part of the reason why Garrison72 recommended that

You should play it and enjoy it.

Many of us were disappointed, myself included, however, I try not to dwell overmuch on these matters, and simply appreciate the game's story and artistry upon their own merits.

 

[dragonbird]

Hmm, what are some other story elements that don't follow from decisions that could have been made in TW2?

It's not so much contradict as ignore. If the Conclave was established at the end of TW2, that decision is reflected in TW3, but other people in the game have their own agenda, and Geralt's choices didn't impact on the world as much as one may wish.

Even if you chose a TW2 path that resulted in the Conclave being formed, there's still a witch-hunt against the Lodge. There are those in power who want to stir up the population against mages and sorceresses in general, and they've had six months to do so. The population is suffering because of the war, and mobs do like their scapegoats.

 

[Aelius28]

It's not so much contradict as ignore. If the Conclave was established at the end of TW2, that decision is reflected in TW3, but other people in the game have their own agenda, and Geralt's choices didn't impact on the world as much as one may wish.

Even if you chose a TW2 path that resulted in the Conclave being formed, there's still a witch-hunt against the Lodge. There are those in power who want to stir up the population against mages and sorceresses in general, and they've had six months to do so. The population is suffering because of the war, and mobs do like their scapegoats.

Also, one thing Triss remarked upon soon after I found her was that mages are a tremendous source of coin, which is something those in power are much in need of during wartime. That was also hinted at when the temple guards confronted the thieves looting Triss's former residence, shooing them off and claiming the property for the authorities.

 

[dragonbird]

Also, one thing Triss remarked upon soon after I found her was that mages are a tremendous source of coin

I think what she said was that Novigrad was a tremendous source of coin? Which is why it hasn't been invaded. But yes, the witch-hunters are getting quite a lot of revenue from confiscated property.

 

[wright1978]

Reading the title brings back memories of my initial confusion at launch.

 

[ajiehb]

I think you've been expecting too much from CD RED. If you will look at Witcher 1 and Witcher 2 you will find that bringing players decision from one game to another never was strong part of this dev team.

 

[Alexius321]

I'm using a save file from The Witcher 2 where every choice I made vis-a-vis Triss was romantic. Yet I just came upon her in Novigrad for the first time and throughout our initial walk around the city (doing the rat job) she and Geralt kept saying things like "We agreed to just be friends" (uhh, no?) or "I was afraid there'd be bad blood between us" (uhh, why?) and even the journal entry for her character says that we broke off our relationship (uhh, what the hell? No we sodding didn't.)

What the hell is going on here?

(Also, despite the section I had to post this in, please keep any answers spoiler-free regarding anything I haven't gotten to yet in the game.)

You can interpret it in many ways, but it ultimately comes to - because CDPR decided that is how it is going to be. No point in overanalyzing in my opinion.

To make it a bit clearer, draw a parallel between the Witcher 2 - Witcher 3 and the Witcher 1 - Witcher 2 transitions. Namely, imagine that I have decided to finish the Witcher 1 with Shani as a 'romance option'. Is this important in the Witcher 2? Will I still be with Shani? No. You start the game in bed with Triss, and Shani is not even present in the game at all. That's just how they decided to make the game.

I could imagine that CDPR decided to lean on the book lore more than before, so that after Geralt has completely recovered his memory he would go and try to find Yennefer. Because..

Spoiler

In the books, Geralt trully loves only Yennefer no matter how many women you have been with while separated.

not really a spoiler, you can read it. But hey...

Don't worry, you can still end up with Triss, as people have stated here.

By book canon, you will also be "bound" to Yen, because of a spell cast by a djinn. The apologist version (which I subscribe to) is that this means you with EITHER be in love with Just Yen, or be in love with both Triss and Yen and therefore conflicted.

Unless I don't truly understand your meaning of the word 'bound' as used here, you are blatantly wrong about the wish that Geralt made.

Spoiler

Geralt's wish was that his FATE be bound to Yennefer's fate, the reason being he wanted to save Yennefer's life. This is more or less the only possible wish he could have made which would be able to achieve that since djinns cannot attack/harm/kill their master - Geralt, in this case. Ergo, can't kill Geralt means - can't kill Yennefer. The wish has absolutely nothing to do with love. If Geralt had wished for love, djinn could have still killed Yennefer immediately afterwards.

Also, there are people who are of opinion (and they may be even somewhat justified by the short story itself) that Geralt fell in love with Yennefer more or less immediately - love at first sight. Therefore, one could even claim that he made the wish because of love - the wish is still their fates being intertwined, not to love each other (I'm not sure such a wish would be possible even). I personally don't agree with this. He may have been infatuated, intrigued by Yennefer at best, and the reason he saved her was more or less a white-knight action. However, no one can deny they later truly fell in love, and this is quite obvious throughout the books.

They didn't fall in love because of the djinn. At best, the wish maybe made it easier for them if we interpret it in this way - because their fates were intertwined, they were bound to meet each other over and over again after splitting up, which in turn gave them the opportunity to develop their relationship over time. This also depends on the interpretation of the word 'fate' - what exactly does 'fate' even mean? This is a plausible view and might be the case, but the fact remains - the wish did not involve LOVE in any imaginable way. They fell in love later (or at first sight if that is how you see it).

Even though it would be totally, completely opposed to the lore, if (game) Geralt fell in love with Triss during the events of the Witcher 1/Witcher 2, the wish that he made would in no way hinder him from remaining in love with Triss. Now about fate, that is still open to interpretation. Maybe his and Yennefer's paths would interlace in the same way, but he would not be 'bound' to be in love with Yennefer in any way because of the wish that he made.

a spoiler from the short story "The Last Wish". Not really a big spoiler, but hey...

You are not 'bound' to love Yennefer by book-canon by any means. Your game Geralt can fall in love even with Dandelion, if the CDPR decide to patch things up

 

[ReptilePZ]

There's a fair number of threads here discussing this design choice

Yep. And seeing that the OP's question has been answered, it's time to close this one.