Please respect player choice, by having multiple prologues in Witcher 4 (Witcher 3 spoilers)

+
Hi there,

The new trailer looks nice, but I am concerned about what this means for player choice. One of the endings for Witcher 3 was Ciri becoming the Empress of Nilfgaard.

Clearly that's being thrown out the window, but there is a lazy and an elegant way of handling it. The lazy way to handle it is to say that the Witcher Ciri ending is canon and "tough luck" to everyone who chose differently.

The elegant way to handle this is to have Cyberpunk 2077-like multi-prologue that leads to the same path. The elegant way would be to allow us to Import our Witcher 3 saves, as is custom for all previous Witcher games, and have a prologue where Empress Ciri gets overthrown and has to flee Nilfgaard, eventually becoming a Witcher.

There is nothing more devastating to a player-choice game than a "canon" ending. Please have respect for player choice to at least have an (optional) Nilfgaard coup / Ciri abdication opening for Witcher 4. If you do not plan to respect player choice, then there's no point making multiple endings.

Thank you.

PS:
Some may challenge this and say "Well what about the death ending". Well then you can not bother with Witcher 4 at all trololol.
On a more serious note, Dragon Age Awakening solved this years ago. If the Origins character is dead, you get to play a new character. If the origins character survived, you can continue playing as them. I doubt CDPR will bother making an alternative character though. It would require far more work than adding a Nilfgaard coup.
 
Last edited:
About death ending - the game director implied that you can interpret it as her not actually dying, so there is that.
I'm more curious about how are they going to handle the political aspect - there are several distinctly different world states by the end of Witcher 3, all of which would have big ramifications on most of the Continent. So, either they are going to place the game in some remote location, unaffected by war, and only reference the bigger events in passing ("Lords are fighting their wars, but it doesn't change much for the little folk"), or they will have to significantly re-write big portions on the game, depending on the outcomes player choose. There is also, like you said before, a lazy way of saying that a certain outcome is canon.

I'm inclined to believe that a first option is the one that is going to happen, although the third is also a possibility. But who knows, maybe there will be chunks of side-quests, that are either accessible or not, depending on who won the war.
 
Stories need canon. Every story can't keep using all branching choices from the last. 3 games in you'll have hundreds of different scenes/scenarios/places/story elements. It's not disrespecting players choices. It's making things realistic for development. Look at Mass Effect, or Dragon Age. Very few choices that actually carry over ever actually affect anything.
 

Toyen

Forum veteran
Yeah I agree. I don't expect to play as Empress Ciri sitting on the throne doing politics but we do deserve more explanation than 'oh well she changed her mind'.

So we could have 3 prologues and it could go something like this for example:

1. Witcher Path Prologue - Witcher ending import and default for new players

A super fun monster contract. Reconnecting with Geralt, he learns Ciri has undergone the mutations and helps her kill the monster.

Reward: Special Sword

2. Empress Path Prologue - Empress import.

A fast paced action sequence where Ciri is overthrown due to a political conspiracy in Nilfgaard and must flee back to the Northern Kingdoms.

Reward: Nilfgaardian Armor

3. 'Dead' Path Prologue - Ciri died import.

An introspective prologue sequence where Ciri is shown travelling the white frost wilderness and fighting the white frost, ultimately stopping it and barely escaping with her life back to Northern Kingdoms.

Reward: Some special Ability or Ability points
 
I do agree with you folks that prior player choices should be absolutely respected. I never played the games so as a newcomer I won't know whether or not something has been respected, but I know how I felt in Veilguard (and throughout Dragon Age in general) every time the developers stomped on a choice I'd made for my previous heroes.

So for whatever it's worth Devs, please don't trash earlier player choices for the sake of newcomers like me. We don't need it, we don't really WANT it, and if we ever DO decide to go and play the earlier games just to have a complete picture of the world, we'd like to recognize what we're seeing as a prelude to what just happened.
 
I believe The Witcher 4 needs to respect player choices by having multiple prologues that reflect the different possible endings of The Witcher 3. This could be done in a few ways:

  1. A branching narrative
  2. Multiple starting points
  3. A customizable backstory
I understand that it might be challenging to accommodate all possible endings, but I believe it's important to respect player choice. The Witcher 3 was a masterpiece partly because of its impactful choices, and I hope The Witcher 4 will continue that tradition. I’m wishing CD Projekt Red the best in navigating the roads ahead to make this a future Game of the Year.
 
I agree.

Something similar to Cyberpunk's start scenarios would be nice. Granted, it's different with an existing character who can be interpreted to die in one previous ending, but it isn't impossible. It'd probably be just a matter of writing, which CDPR certainly are good at.

I will be disappointed if they simply make the "Ciri becomes a witcher" ending canon.
 
Stories need canon. Every story can't keep using all branching choices from the last. 3 games in you'll have hundreds of different scenes/scenarios/places/story elements. It's not disrespecting players choices. It's making things realistic for development. Look at Mass Effect, or Dragon Age. Very few choices that actually carry over ever actually affect anything.
Not every choice can carry over, but the major ones should. Mass Effect is a terrible example for your argument, because that game series carried over an enormous amount of user choice from game to game. Mass Effect 3 can comment on the choices you made in Mass Effect 1 DLC that most people never even played.

Witcher 2 respected the primary choices of Witcher 1's ending. If you side with the order and help Siegfried become the grandmaster, the order is friendly with you in WItcher 2.

I already covered dragon age in my OP.
Dragon Age Awakening solved this years ago. If the Origins character is dead, you get to play a new character. If the origins character survived, you can continue playing as them.
I do not expect them to go that far, so perhaps they can play into that theory that she didn't actually die in the "bad" ending. Veilguard only carries over 3 choices, but past Dragon Age games carried over far more.

They had multiple opening for Cyberpunk 2077. There is no reason why they cannot have multiple opening for Witcher 4.
 
Last edited:
I dunno, I kinda think they should just pick "Witcher Ciri" ending and run with it. It's hard to tell a cohesive story and account for backgrounds that would be as varied as the Witcher and Empress ending. Those are extremely different lives, and the game seems to presuppose the Witcher path based on the title. I could be wrong, but it probably makes sense to just say this game takes place assuming that ending, ya know?
 
Last edited:
I dunno, I kinda think they should just pick "Witcher Ciri" ending and run with it. It's hard to tell a cohesive story and account for backgrounds that would be as varied as the Witcher and Empress ending. Those are extremely different lives, and the game seems to presuppose the Witcher path based on the title. I could be wrong, but it probably makes sense to just say this game takes place assuming that ending, ya know?
Witcher 2 and Witcher 3 had save imports. Cyberpunk 2077 had 3 openings. Why are some people so opposed to this idea now? We are talking about an RPG video game, not a linear book.

Canon to a choice-filled RPG is like telling players that they "played the game wrong". And if that's how it's going to be, then we may as well wait for Witcher 5 to come out and tell us how to play Witcher 4 "The right way".

They should try to acknowledge the major choices of past games, maybe (hopefully) they already plan to, but I am writing this feedback early, just in case.
 
Witcher 2 and Witcher 3 had save imports. Cyberpunk 2077 had 3 openings. Why are some people so opposed to this idea now? We are talking about an RPG video game, not a linear book.

Canon to a choice-filled RPG is like telling players that they "played the game wrong". And if that's how it's going to be, then we may as well wait for Witcher 5 to come out and tell us how to play Witcher 4 "The right way".

They should try to acknowledge the major choices of past games, maybe (hopefully) they already plan to, but I am writing this feedback early, just in case.
I think that is a totally reasonable take that I just happen to disagree for the sake of a more coherent narrative and efficient use of limited resources.

I'd rather they focus the design time and narrative attention on the Witcher Ciri ending story than try to accommodate both possibilities throughout the game in a way that honored each possibility. I agree with your take in the OP that just hand waving it away with a few lines would be very underwhelming for people who went with Empress Ciri. However, really honoring each choice would be a lot of divided writing and design time that would certainly take away from other opportunities. EDIT: And remember, they've said they anticipate making this another trilogy, so you'd have to do that across three games. END EDIT Therefore, I think the best course of action is just pick an ending and go with it so as to focus on a single coherent narrative.

You could do different prologues, but this is apparently years later, and she's undergone the trial of the grasses already. So how would a separate prologue emphasize the distinction? Practically speaking she's already ended up on the Witcher path anyways. I just don't think that merely throwing in different dialogue options would really feel like it was honoring the Empress ending much at all. If you wanted to really honor it you'd need some unique questlines, NPCs, and etc to really make it feel like "Empress" ending and "Witcher" ending Ciri are distinct. That's a lot of design time away from whatever the focus of the game will end up being.

So I think honoring both endings well is probably more trouble than it's worth, and trying to do it half way through a few dialogue choices here or there would feel cheap. So I'd rather they just focus on the one. It's totally cool to disagree with that preference.
 
Ok I'm not sure they picked up a canon ending, most likely we will have something similar to Cyberpunk, at least I hope we will, after reasing this (different intros for different TW3 endings).
“The one complication is probably the idea that there is an ending in which Ciri can die in The Witcher 3,” explains Maher. Thankfully that ending, which is one of three different fates for Ciri and the outcome of several hidden choices made throughout the game, isn’t quite as clear cut as it may seem.
“There are hints in that ending that highlight the fact that she probably does not die,” says Maher. And so regardless of the events you personally witnessed at the end of your own Witcher 3 playthrough, the sequel will not “break any canon or even offend any canon.”
 
I just want to throw in my support for this.

I love what I saw from the trailer but I am rather concerned that the Witcher ending will be canonised.

The suggestion of three opening paths would be ideal, though I would be fine with NPCs acknowledging that Ciri was empress if that was your ending in The Witcher 3 (e.g. people commenting on the empress's dissapearance; they would not necessarily recognise Ciri). At a bare minimum, The Witcher 4 should be set sufficiently in the future (like 10+ years) so that players can make up their own 'head canon' about what transpired in the meantime for Ciri to end up on the Path.

What would ruin it for me is a "Ciri changed her mind and became a Witcher anyway" right after The Witcher 3. As others have pointed out, that would be like telling players that they played the game wrong. It would suck and retroactively damage my player-driven story.

Please CDPR; acknowledge the other two endings in any other way than "she changed her mind". Set the Witcher 4 10+ years after Blood and Wine.
 
I think if you don't like the 'Ciri becomes a Witcher' ending, then you can just pretend that the Witcher 4 is set in an alternative universe to your game, where Ciri didn't become Empress and chose to remain as a Witcher. it doesn't mean your TW3 ending is less valid, it just means that it's not the ending TW4 is taking forward as its narrative.

I agree with others saying I don't think it's a good use of time or resources to create this entire backstory for those who chose the Empress ending to show why Ciri became Empress and then decided to ditch it for becoming a witcher. If anything that undermines the story more. It's better to just say that TW4 is a continuation of the universe where Ciri chose to remain as a witcher. And if that doesn't fit with your TW3 game, well, this is a different universe where Ciri made a different choice. So it doesn't change anything.
 
I think if you don't like the 'Ciri becomes a Witcher' ending, then you can just pretend that the Witcher 4 is set in an alternative universe to your game, where Ciri didn't become Empress and chose to remain as a Witcher.
You could also simply disregard the entire "Something Ends, Something Begins" epilogue, since it is technically post-game content.
 
Hi there,

The new trailer looks nice, but I am concerned about what this means for player choice. One of the endings for Witcher 3 was Ciri becoming the Empress of Nilfgaard.

Clearly that's being thrown out the window, but there is a lazy and an elegant way of handling it. The lazy way to handle it is to say that the Witcher Ciri ending is canon and "tough luck" to everyone who chose differently.

The elegant way to handle this is to have Cyberpunk 2077-like multi-prologue that leads to the same path. The elegant way would be to allow us to Import our Witcher 3 saves, as is custom for all previous Witcher games, and have a prologue where Empress Ciri gets overthrown and has to flee Nilfgaard, eventually becoming a Witcher.

There is nothing more devastating to a player-choice game than a "canon" ending. Please have respect for player choice to at least have an (optional) Nilfgaard coup / Ciri abdication opening for Witcher 4. If you do not plan to respect player choice, then there's no point making multiple endings.

Thank you.

PS:
Some may challenge this and say "Well what about the death ending". Well then you can not bother with Witcher 4 at all trololol.
On a more serious note, Dragon Age Awakening solved this years ago. If the Origins character is dead, you get to play a new character. If the origins character survived, you can continue playing as them. I doubt CDPR will bother making an alternative character though. It would require far more work than adding a Nilfgaard coup.
I agree with this as well. I had some discussion on that a while ago on the forum, so I will leave the link to it instead of repeating them here again.

 
Top Bottom