That is exactly what I posted a day ago. A better closure will certainly lessen this "endgame depression" if not entirely kill it. It might be a bit less costly too than an entirely new world state.I didn't read every previous thread so there may be a good argument for me somewhere, but I really hope CDPR will NOT spend any resource on creating a post-ending game world. The narrative ends, that's it. The entire post-ending open world is really just meant to let players do side quests we missed earlier.
Yes Skyrim has post-ending open world and that gives it replay value, but that's because player decisions matter preciously little in Skyrim, so its post-ending world does not need to look very different from the pre-ending one: blue coat guards in Solitude vs. red coat guards in Windhelm... one can easily do that. Witcher 3 is different. Player choices shape the entire fate of the world, so to make a post-ending world reflecting player choices is a huge undertaking, almost like making a Witcher 4.
The same resource could and should be used on some other much more urgent problems, such as the lack of closure in the ending slide show, the lack of closure for Geralt personally, and the rushed and underwhelming Act 3.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think most of the people who want a post-ending open world ACTUALLY want a satisfying closure to so many things/characters that are not well described in the game's vanilla ending. I support with both hands and feet for an expanded epilogue and a post-ending cutscene, which I think provides closure better than post-ending open world.