Iorveth? Francesca Findabair? Dol Blathanna? SPOILERS

+
Actually CDPR never promised that your previous decisions would have a great impact on The Witcher 3. When this question was asked, they were always kind of reluctant and said that TW3 is more of a personal journey and that your older decisions would not have a great effect on it.

I don't really care what was promised, it's not like they kept their promises anyway. What I do care about is the fact our decisions were meaningless and characters simply disappeared from the world with no explanation or even mention of them, I don't like that. They didn't even give us our damn gear from the previous game.
 
Last edited:
Actually CDPR never promised that your previous decisions would have a great impact on The Witcher 3. When this question was asked, they were always kind of reluctant and said that TW3 is more of a personal journey and that your older decisions would not have a great effect on it.

So what was the point of all the different endings in TW2? Whats the point of even having choices if there are no real consequences and everything is retconned?

---------- Updated at 03:59 PM ----------

Some gamers got themselves spoiled by Bioware "Create your own story with imported saves and 204940 decisions to make that in the end are an illusion of free choices".

They keep conveniently forgetting that CD Projekt RED has limited resources and staff, hence creating a game which plot(s) would take into consideration ALL possible, even the most insignificant decisions, would take dozen, dozen of years. And in the end people would still be complaining, because someone should be in this place not there, someone is alive, whereas in the previous game was meant to be killed, oh , and graphics sucks!!!!oneonee!!

Grow up.

So why even give us choices and different Endings then? Stop defending CDPR
I like TW3 too but the flaws need to be mentioned and choices not mattering is certainly a big one
 
The second Witcher barely cared about what happened in the first Witcher as well. This is a problem, and one I hope they fix somehow (an Extended Edition, maybe? One of the DLCs?).
 
Amazing how Roche can play a huge part in the ending of the game and the state of the world but Iorveth just gets (most likely) killed off-screen and is only mentioned by a random scoia'tael. Doesn't matter anymore I suppose but it seems most of the choices are of either very little consequence or none at all. At least Bioware got that part right, if we don't count ME3 ofc. Ugh, just... ugh.
 
I think many ppl have a false perception of decisions. Let's take Henselt for example. Some have criticized, that Henselt dies no matter how you decide in TW2. But so what? Geralt is not the only one who decides the fate of other people.
Let me explain that with a RL story:
A year or so ago, my Father found a little kitten in the woods, while taking the dog out for a walk. It wasn't a wild cat since it was very trustful towards humans, so most likely someone exposed that cat into the forest to let it die there.
My Father took the kitten back at home were we nursed it back to health and kept it as a housecat.
5 Months later the cat was hit and killed by a car.
So even though my Father saved the kitten, ultimately that didn't change the cats fate.

Same goes for ingame decisions. Just because YOU made a decision doesn't mean other can't mess with it.
 
There's literally no point in playing the Witcher 2. None of your decisions matter. Iorveth's path is forgotten - every character you meet, erased from The Witcher 3.

CDPR pandered to first time players and got rid of all traces of their previous games in the series. As a stand alone game, it's great. As a sequel, it's abysmal.

If you actually took time to play TW2, you'd realize that the entire game is just a giant lead-up to the Witcher 3. Yet, none of it even carries over. It's frustrating as a fan.
 
I think many ppl have a false perception of decisions. Let's take Henselt for example. Some have criticized, that Henselt dies no matter how you decide in TW2. But so what? Geralt is not the only one who decides the fate of other people.
Let me explain that with a RL story:
A year or so ago, my Father found a little kitten in the woods, while taking the dog out for a walk. It wasn't a wild cat since it was very trustful towards humans, so most likely someone exposed that cat into the forest to let it die there.
My Father took the kitten back at home were we nursed it back to health and kept it as a housecat.
5 Months later the cat was hit and killed by a car.
So even though my Father saved the kitten, ultimately that didn't change the cats fate.

Same goes for ingame decisions. Just because YOU made a decision doesn't mean other can't mess with it.

That has 0 bearing on the topic and even less so in the context. You clearly didn't play the previous games or even read the books. But everyone's still an expert. Why don't you go play with your cat and stop disturbing the thread?
 
I think many ppl have a false perception of decisions. Let's take Henselt for example. Some have criticized, that Henselt dies no matter how you decide in TW2. But so what? Geralt is not the only one who decides the fate of other people.
Let me explain that with a RL story:
A year or so ago, my Father found a little kitten in the woods, while taking the dog out for a walk. It wasn't a wild cat since it was very trustful towards humans, so most likely someone exposed that cat into the forest to let it die there.
My Father took the kitten back at home were we nursed it back to health and kept it as a housecat.
5 Months later the cat was hit and killed by a car.
So even though my Father saved the kitten, ultimately that didn't change the cats fate.

Same goes for ingame decisions. Just because YOU made a decision doesn't mean other can't mess with it.

You are confusing RL with games
These are RPG games where we make choices and where we expect consequences to them
With this excuse ("its realistic") the developers could basically shit on every decision that we made, why even have choices then?

Lets turn TW into a linear game series like GTA or whatever

---------- Updated at 06:53 PM ----------

There's literally no point in playing the Witcher 2. None of your decisions matter. Iorveth's path is forgotten - every character you meet, erased from The Witcher 3.

CDPR pandered to first time players and got rid of all traces of their previous games in the series. As a stand alone game, it's great. As a sequel, it's abysmal.

If you actually took time to play TW2, you'd realize that the entire game is just a giant lead-up to the Witcher 3. Yet, none of it even carries over. It's frustrating as a fan.

And they pandered to book fans don't forget that part
I agree with you I almost wish I hadn't played TW2 before TW3, its just such a terrible sequel but also a very good standalone game..

And people always said that Bioware doesn't care about our choices and that CDPR does, lol
The ME Trilogy at least had some continuity and consistency
 
You are confusing RL with games
These are RPG games where we make choices and where we expect consequences to them
With this excuse ("its realistic") the developers could basically shit on every decision that we made, why even have choices then?

Lets turn TW into a linear game series like GTA or whatever

Very much this. Does it make sense from RL point of view that Iorveth and Saskia are dead or irrelevant? Sure. Does it make sense from the game point of view? Not really... why dedicate half of one game to two characters and then not even mention them in the other?

I'm a book fan and I'm still disappointed with the lack of continuity - I mean, I love Ciri and all, but it just feel like TW2 didn't matter at all.
 
I am not confusing RL with games, I was just merely making an example.
And Iorveth and Saskia are irrelevant in TW3 even if you chose them in TW2. They were both fighting for the Pontar Valley, which has been conquered by Nilfgaard. They are either dead or unter the rule of the Black Ones and if you look at the map you will see, that TW3 plays at a completely different area. There is no ingame reason why either of them should be in Novigrad or nearby, while it DOES make sense for roche to be there, because it is Temeria at least part of it. Iorveth/saskia were never big buddys of Geralt, they didn't even had the same goals.
 
Amazing how Roche can play a huge part in the ending of the game and the state of the world but Iorveth just gets (most likely) killed off-screen and is only mentioned by a random scoia'tael. Doesn't matter anymore I suppose but it seems most of the choices are of either very little consequence or none at all. At least Bioware got that part right, if we don't count ME3 ofc. Ugh, just... ugh.

Must have missed that. What does the scoia'tael say about Iorveth?
I can see why Witcher went for a trilogy where lots of the choices became muddied or not visible. It allowed them to craft an epic trilogy without having to plumb resources into sinks that many wouldn't see. Not happy at some of the decisions but i can see the logic in the devs eyes.
 
Must have missed that. What does the scoia'tael say about Iorveth?
.
That he is dead, full of arrows or something. Really lame way of doing it if you ask me. If he was to be killed of like that, at least we could have been told in a conversation, maybe with Zoltan.
 
That he is dead, full of arrows or something. Really lame way of doing it if you ask me. If he was to be killed of like that, at least we could have been told in a conversation, maybe with Zoltan.

Gutting and rather needless, especially as it was done off screen. If they wanted to do that surely finding a band of dead elves and a mortally wounded Iorveth would have been more fitting.
 
Gutting and rather needless, especially as it was done off screen. If they wanted to do that surely finding a band of dead elves and a mortally wounded Iorveth would have been more fitting.

Needless is definitely the right word, I would rather they didn`t mention him at all, rather then just a random comment by a random npc. Well maybe since they didnt show us the body there is still hope they will add some more about what happened.
 
Must have missed that. What does the scoia'tael say about Iorveth?
I can see why Witcher went for a trilogy where lots of the choices became muddied or not visible. It allowed them to craft an epic trilogy without having to plumb resources into sinks that many wouldn't see. Not happy at some of the decisions but i can see the logic in the devs eyes.

i was at that camp sitting there 20 mins, i didnt got the banter what so ever. maybe you need certain criterias for it to trigger, i dont know. so yeah for my gamesave, he is only mentioned once, at the interview and still alive until some npc actually tells me he is dead.
 
Must have missed that. What does the scoia'tael say about Iorveth?
I can see why Witcher went for a trilogy where lots of the choices became muddied or not visible. It allowed them to craft an epic trilogy without having to plumb resources into sinks that many wouldn't see. Not happy at some of the decisions but i can see the logic in the devs eyes.

I also missed it myself but someone here posted a video of it in this thread at the first page. I'm thinking it's cut content they plan to sell off as DLC later or they simply don't give a f*ck anymore. Either way this is so bad...
 
So basically you want characters who have absolutely no stake in the Story nor the region of TW3 in tw3 because they appeared in tw2 where they had a stake in. The Queen has her valley of flowers to take care of (which is stated near the end of the game either by triss or yen) and dol blathanna is a long way from velen, and also from toussaint for that matter. Iorveth or Saskia simply don't matter anymore, the pontar valley is a lot of miles upstream of vergen not to mention occupied by nilfgaard. So your choice in either iorveth and a free vergen or roche and a vergen under kaedwen rule, don't matter in tw3 since it's all nilfgaard now. And a comparison with the ME Series is pointless, in ME you stay more or less in the same region of space, you always have the citadell as a meeting place, you don't have anything like that in the witcher games, maybe the palace of vizima but the place doesn't play a big role in the games anyway. In ME you shape the Fate of the Galaxy, in TW you can change the direction of a single little wheel in a very big machine. And now in tw3 you can do the same to a different wheel in the same big machine. Now saying that TW2 is ultimately irrelevant since none of the decisions matter in tw3 is stupid and shows you have not understood what the games are all about -> Geralt and not the fate of the world or even Galaxy.
 
They keep conveniently forgetting that CD Projekt RED has limited resources and staff

Germanicanus, it's called a business. To make money, you need to spend it. I can't tell you how many businesses I know who can triple their profit by doubling their expenditure, yet fail to do so because they lack the vision to see beyond the current scope of their plans.


This argument isn't going to convince anyone on here to change their mind.
 
Top Bottom