I agree however that Radovid character was totally butchered. He was turned from a brilliant strategist to a mad fanatic in the Witcher 3.
That did annoy me.
See, I never thought Radovid should be portrayed as a "good guy." I never thought he should be presented as the ideal, or even best ruler. And I did think that he was flirting with fanatical beliefs in TW2, and that it might continue in TW3, and it would make sense to.
But to make him into a raving lunatic?
Yes, Radovid would have been pressured, with all the weight on his shoulders. Yes, he would probably get a bit paranoid, be even more ruthless than before, and rely too much on the fanaticism of the Eternal Fire to secure his rule. But he was always a cold calculating politician, not a madman. He may not make the wisest policies, but he makes them for reasons of state. He had absolutely no hint of lunacy in TW2. Obsession with Philippa, yes. But not madness, not to this degree. But now, he is portrayed as Loredo 2.0.
Why? to make it obvious that people should hate him? This is almost Meredith level.
Radovid would have been hated anyways. He supports the extermination of mages and anything nonhuman. He represents the violence of the birth of the modern state. He didn't need to be made into a madman out of nowhere.
And since when was the Witcher content with showing only one aspect of someone's rule? That all Radovid does is fanaticism and mass murder? Why not make it nuanced, and present a complex picture? Remember that scene describing Henselt as an amoral son of a bitch, but who makes Kaedwen prosperous? Where did that go?
In both characterization and the structure of the political situation, TW3 was mediocre at best.