Geopolitical Backdrop of the Witcher Games (clarification sought)

+
Geopolitical Backdrop of the Witcher Games (clarification sought)

So I've been boning up on the wider geopolitical happenings on the Continent during the time frame of the 3 games. For me, the significant events are the Nilfgaardian invasions of the north.
The first invasion saw the conquest of Cintra, but the invasion was ultimately stopped at the Battle of Sodden Hill.
The second invasion was also unsuccessful, and the Battle of Brenna was a defeat for Emperor Emhyr.
The third invasion occurs at the end of Witcher 2 and the outcome, to a certain extent, depends on the player's choices in Witcher 3. At the start of the game (Witcher 3), the opposing forces are more or less at a stalemate along the Pontar River.
The events of Witcher 2 obviously occurs after the second invasion but before the third. I am however unclear as to where to place Witcher 1 in this timeline.
 
Hayashi.226;n10969196 said:
I am however unclear as to where to place Witcher 1 in this timeline.
The first game also takes place after the second invasion. As I recall, the precise chronology is a bit blurry, in relation to the next two instalments, but it is stated in the introduction that the events befall five years after the war (ca. 1270).
 
As for the book lore, the video game "The Witcher" plays in the year of 1273. Battle of Brenna was in the year of 1268.
CDPR changed the timelne (dunno why) so for the game lore the video game "The Witcher" takes place in the year of 1270 and the Battle of Brenna was in the year of 1265.
 
Last edited:

Guest 3847602

Guest
Deemonef;n10969274 said:
CDPR changed the timelne (dunno why) so for the game lore the video game "The Witcher" takes place in the year of 1270 and the Battle of Brenna was in the year of 1265.

The only explanation I can think of is that the writers wanted Radovid to be old enough for marriage (he's 15 in TW1), but didn't want the game to be dealing with witch-hunts (they began in 1272, 5 years after battle of Brenna would be 1273).
Of course, it could have been just a simple oversight, but it seems weird that they could make such a blunder in a game that was jam-packed with book references.
 
How close does TW1/2/3 match the book series?
The events depicted in the games take place about 5 years after The Lady of the Lake. It is not a continuation of Sapkowski's work, but fanfiction, if you will - games based on the universe, characters and lore created by him. CDPR took the books' material and continued Geralt's story, and in TW3, his relationship with Ciri and Yenn as well, giving them a more romantic closure compared to the biittersweet one in the final novel.
 
How close does TW1/2/3 match the book series?

The Witcher 1 matches the atmosphere quite closely, the other games IMO less so. The main characters in the games I would say are quite different from the books. Geralt is less whiny, Triss is less needy, Yen is less bitchy, and Ciri is... well less of a f*ucking psychopath. :)
 
Agreed. Game Ciri is too genteel, compared to book Ciri.

I also agree. But I sort of think it would have been hard to qualify Ciri to the game audience any other way. We can't assume players of the game would have read the novels. (I've only read 2!)

Having what basically amounts to cutting, world-hardened "punk" suddenly appear as Ciri in-game would probably have left a lot of players feeling, like, "Whhhaaa...???"

Similar to how they make Geralt less of a whiner and a pessimist and more blankly stoic. Far easier for players to latch onto the gameplay and superimpose their own views on the nuances of the character's motivations. Which is...arguably...one of the major aspects of a game versus a book.
 
Top Bottom