New CG Cinematic for The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt Shows Geralt “Killing Monsters”

[Senteria]

By the way, has anyone noticed that in one of the killing monsters' screenshots you see Geralt and Vesemir riding away with those nilfgaardian boss watching them ride away? It feels like that screenshot was taken BEFORE the events of the trailer. So maybe it is an actual quest with cgi trailers for it? Just thinking out loud.
Actually, nevermind. Just compared the shots. They removed the two henchmen that were busy with the woman.

 

[Garrison72]

I was wondering if anyone else thought Geralt was limping. Or maybe I'm a dunce and it's meant to be obvious.

 

[tommy5761]

This thread is going around in circles with no one being able to change the other`s way of thinking .

Surely gamescom or shortly after I think there may be some new information....I hope

 

[cmdr_silverbolt]

This thread is going around in circles with no one being able to change the other`s way of thinking .

Surely gamescom or shortly after I think there may be some new information....I hope

Pretty sure that will start a whole new cycle of forum fussing

@ Slim: maybe he got hurt during the monster hunt? Interesting details to note, though. I wonder what else it could mean.

 

[Garrison72]

Pretty sure that will start a whole new cycle of forum fussing

@ Slim: maybe he got hurt during the monster hunt?

It's from the books, his hip was crushed by Vilgefortz...I think. Haven't got that far.

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

I was wondering if anyone else thought Geralt was limping. Or maybe I'm a dunce and it's meant to be obvious.

He met a succubus on the way.

 

[cmdr_silverbolt]

 

[M4xw0lf.978]

It's from the books, his hip was crushed by Vilgefortz...I think. Haven't got that far.

In TW1 Berengar makes an allusion to it, he tells Geralt he had spotted an imperfection in his defense, which is due to this injury. If this was done deliberately in the trailer, that's some pretty insane attention to detail... and a nice finding, Slimgrin

 

[wichat]

It's from the books, his hip was crushed by Vilgefortz...I think. Haven't got that far.

Since his departure from Brokilon he limped through all the journey and fight with huge pain in his knee. Yes.

 

[CostinRaz]

In TW1 Berengar makes an allusion to it, he tells Geralt he had spotted an imperfection in his defense, which is due to this injury. If this was done deliberately in the trailer, that's some pretty insane attention to detail... and a nice finding, Slimgrin />

But it was more then that actually. Geralt did move in TW1 with a brace around one of his legs, and he did have a lack of mobility in one of them.

 

[secondchildren]

I want to higlight a few clear points for all the people involved:

* You are free to speculate about what you want both about morality and the game/trailer itself
* You are free to talk about war, torture, violence, raping etc
* You are free to speculate about any single detail in this trailer, and the characters' actions
* Any form of arguement related with "good reasons to use violence and brutalization" are considered supportive to the above subjects hence WON'T BE TOLERATED.
* Any other form of justification for raping, violence, abuses, brutalization, torture etc. are not allowed and won't be tolerated.


In this solely latter case thread will be locked and people found guilty will straightly receive a proper treatment.

 

[Sirnaq]

Doesn't looks like limping to me.

 

[Agent_Blue]

Doesn't looks like limping to me.

There's a swagger which could be taken for a slight limp.
Not clear though.

*edit*
Have gone through it 100 loops. Does look like a slight limp to me.

 

[seyu]

I think everyone agrees that Geralt was in the wrong for saving the girl from a rather unpleasant death. The issue is that while the dialogue talks about grey morality, the content of the trailer shows a one-way choice. There was no dilemma or moral ambiguity in what Geralt did. Sure, what the soldiers were doing was quasi-legal, under the banner of Nilfgaard, but that doesn't mean sinking some wench's teeth in with a hammer is gentlemanly behavior.

It would have been a much better trailer if, say, Tomek Baginski showed a bunch of wronged civilians doing the same to a Nilfgaardian captive.

 

[M4xw0lf.978]

What have you evil people done again? I see a lot of red text ^^

There's a swagger which could be taken for a slight limp.
Not clear though.

I think Geralt's walk does look like limping. Hadn't noticed before.

 

[MarcAuron]

Geralt doesn't limp, Fringila solved the problem.

 

[username_2093396]

I think everyone agrees that Geralt was in the wrong for saving the girl from a rather unpleasant death. The issue is that while the dialogue talks about grey morality, the content of the trailer shows a one-way choice. There was no dilemma or moral ambiguity in what Geralt did. Sure, what the soldiers were doing was quasi-legal, under the banner of Nilfgaard, but that doesn't mean sinking some wench's teeth in with a hammer is gentlemanly behavior.

It would have been a much better trailer if, say, Tomek Baginski showed a bunch of wronged civilians doing the same to a Nilfgaardian captive.

I think Geralt's monologue was referring to the fact that he's a monster-hunter, not a policeman, so it's not really his business to get involved in every injustice that he sees. However he decides that if he's going to be a monster-hunter, then he shouldn't choose which evil is worse by killing regular monsters while allowing human monsters to keep hurting people. That's why he says he'd rather not choose at all and then proceeds to get involved and defend the girl from monsters.

 

[wichat]

I think everyone agrees that Geralt was in the wrong

Well, where have you the list with the names of "everyone"? 'cause I don't remember have signed such a statement like this since I feel myself a part of the people who shares him/heer opinion in this thread... not a nobody....

 

[vivaxardas2015]

I want to higlight a few clear points for all the people involved:

* You are free to speculate about what you want both about morality and the game/trailer itself
* You are free to talk about war, torture, violence, raping etc
* You are free to speculate about any single detail in this trailer, and the characters' actions
* Any form of arguement related with "good reasons to use violence and brutalization" are considered supportive to the above subjects hence WON'T BE TOLERATED.
* Any other form of justification for raping, violence, abuses, brutalization, torture etc. are not allowed and won't be tolerated.


In this solely latter case thread will be locked and people found guilty will straightly receive a proper treatment.

You know, concerning the second one one, we probably shouldn't. I got 3 days suspension not after giving any arguments in support (it was exactly the opposite), and not after a bad example, but after I started my little Socratic inquiry into consistency of someone's moral beliefs concerning different actions. As Lord Varys would say, I started asking questions. Apparently, it was perceived as my implying someone else has undesirable views, and I got busted on 'corrupting the youth' charges. I am not disputing this, this forum has its rules, but it is far from clear what guidelines are concerning very touchy subjects, and what may be perceived as inappropriate or insulting given that different moderators may have different views. So I would suggest we steer clear from this completely, and stick to the discussion of the game.

 

[GuyNwah]

You know, concerning the second one one, we probably shouldn't. I got 3 days suspension not after giving any arguments in support (it was exactly the opposite), and not after a bad example, but after I started my little Socratic inquiry into consistency of someone's moral beliefs concerning different actions. As Lord Varys would say, I started asking questions. Apparently, it was perceived as my implying someone else has undesirable views, and I got busted on 'corrupting the youth' charges. I am not disputing this, this forum has its rules, but it is far from clear what guidelines are concerning very touchy subjects, and what may be perceived as inappropriate or insulting given that different moderators may have different views. So I would suggest we steer clear from this completely, and stick to the discussion of the game.

Moderator:
There is not, and can be, no "little Socratic inquiry into consistency of someone's moral beliefs". It is actually a claim that another member's moral beliefs are at best ill-considered and at worst childish. It is an insult against other members, and you will not make such attacks on other members under the pretext of "inquiry" here.