Nilfgaard's + Emhyr's Historical Narrative Role (Books & Games Spoilers)
So, I just finished the game- (Congrats, by the way, CDPR: while the game is far from perfect, you've effectly neutered anything that remotely dares to call itself competition)- and I have to admit, I'm rather disappointed that Nilfgaard was more or less a protagonist.
For those who have read the books and played the first two games, while the Northern Kingdoms were far from ideal, Nilfgaard was the ever-looming antagonist- the fundamental greater evil. Emhyr was cold, deceitful, bloody and ruthless, lacking even what little honor the Northern monarchs had; Nilfgaard was ruled with an iron fist, with strict rules, slavery, and a constant flow of corruption, fear, intrigue, and in-fighting used to keep the provinces tamed. Emhyr, likewise, had less than altruistic designs for Ciri.
So the question must be begged: What happened between TW2, where the Nilfs are still portrayed and scheming antagonists, and TW3 where Emhyr is relatively honorable and his followers are, generally at worst, stuffy and pompous? One would expect, per true witcher tradition, at least an even split morally and effectively, between factions, but that's just not the case. Redania and Northern rogues are almost exclusively the enemies, and while those stories are great, Nilfgaard is left- in my opinion at least- as a fairly muted, dull and utterly uninteresting ally.
Please, by all means, correct me if you think I'm wrong. Perhaps I'm simply sour that such a despicable man as Emhyr somehow managed to be a lesser evil, (and that I didn't get a chance to throw him down a well), but I can't help but feel that Nilfgaard has suddenly shifted narrative roles.
So, I just finished the game- (Congrats, by the way, CDPR: while the game is far from perfect, you've effectly neutered anything that remotely dares to call itself competition)- and I have to admit, I'm rather disappointed that Nilfgaard was more or less a protagonist.
For those who have read the books and played the first two games, while the Northern Kingdoms were far from ideal, Nilfgaard was the ever-looming antagonist- the fundamental greater evil. Emhyr was cold, deceitful, bloody and ruthless, lacking even what little honor the Northern monarchs had; Nilfgaard was ruled with an iron fist, with strict rules, slavery, and a constant flow of corruption, fear, intrigue, and in-fighting used to keep the provinces tamed. Emhyr, likewise, had less than altruistic designs for Ciri.
So the question must be begged: What happened between TW2, where the Nilfs are still portrayed and scheming antagonists, and TW3 where Emhyr is relatively honorable and his followers are, generally at worst, stuffy and pompous? One would expect, per true witcher tradition, at least an even split morally and effectively, between factions, but that's just not the case. Redania and Northern rogues are almost exclusively the enemies, and while those stories are great, Nilfgaard is left- in my opinion at least- as a fairly muted, dull and utterly uninteresting ally.
Please, by all means, correct me if you think I'm wrong. Perhaps I'm simply sour that such a despicable man as Emhyr somehow managed to be a lesser evil, (and that I didn't get a chance to throw him down a well), but I can't help but feel that Nilfgaard has suddenly shifted narrative roles.