The next Witcher game, unlike Bloodborne, takes place in the same universe as its predecessors. That's a big difference.
Yeah...the majority would know. But a minority wouldn't. And I think the size of that minority would surprise you. So, why risk the money?
Once a brand name becomes successful (Or a character, catch-phrase...anything memorable, really.), you want to capitalize on it. That's just how marketing works.
Because like I said, the title "Witcher" in and of itself restricts the the gameplay and story experiences that are available to the player. It creates the expectation that, at the very least, you are going to be playing as a Witcher - if not Geralt, then someone like Lambert, Eskel, or a custom version thereof - and a lot of people on this forum have expressed ... hesitation to jump into the shoes of anyone other than The White Wolf. If the next entry into Sapkowski's universe was a standalone product, unencumbered by the literary and video game baggage that comes with this franchise, the REDs would have more freedom to experiment, to craft more characters like The Bloody Baron, Master Mirror, and Olgierd, maybe even do something really wacky like visit other planets. We got a taste of that in the "Through Time and Space" questline, but it was just a taste.
I would be down for an Eskel game or a custom character game. Yes, custom character might not be as powerful story-wise, but it absolutely boosts the gameplay portion of the game, which has seen its fair share of complaints.
Plus, with a custom character, there's opportunities not only to explore multiple witcher schools, but their fighting styles.
Plus, with a custom character, there's opportunities not only to explore multiple witcher schools, but their fighting styles.
I think it simply comes down to "What is C.D.P.R. most likely to do?", and that isn't it. The vast, vast majority of the fans want a Witcher game. Most would be incredibly angry if C.D.P.R. didn't deliver in that regard, and C.D.P.R. knows that.
Indeed, in fact one of the developer quotes from @Eredin_Breacc_Glas even says that the game would not be called "Witcher 4", because it would not be a continuation of the story of the existing trilogy. And if it was called simply "The Witcher: <something>" instead, that would create confusion that the game is some kind of reboot or remake of the saga. If I recall correctly, it was only promised that future games may take place in the Witcher universe (which is large and still features many yet to be explored areas, lore, etc.), not that there will specifically be a game called "The Witcher" again.
It depends on how much customization is possible, of course, if it is limited mostly to things like appearance (which is already possible to some extent in The Witcher 3 with hair and beard styles, armor dyes, etc.) and better support for more gameplay styles, then it is not that much of a problem. On the other hand, a fully customizable protagonist does become a limiting factor when it comes to telling a "personal" story. Imagine if customization like in Skyrim was possible in The Witcher 3, and Geralt was replaced for example with a female Khajiit assassin (and obviously no longer called Geralt), would that not have to have a significant impact on interactions with characters like Ciri, Triss, or Yennefer ? Of course, the easiest solution to that kind of problem is to make things more generic and impersonal. Even just allowing the player to change the witcher's name would not be so easy, a choice from 10 pre-defined names (a rather limited selection) would have required recording more than 11000 additional voiced dialogue lines. Again, it is easiest to replace most occurrences of "Geralt" with "you" or "witcher" or similar, but that also makes the conversations more impersonal.
On the other hand, I guess Cyberpunk 2077 might be better suited for experimenting with the idea of a player created character, and the experience gained during the development of that game could be of help later in future titles.
CDPR could also write a history for the new character themselves. I think they are competent enough to be able to create someone at least as good and interesting as Eskel.
And the first two games did not use that much of Geralt's history either because of the amnesia. If anything, the fact that so many people doubt CDPR's ability to succeed with this approach is a good reason to prove the doubters wrong, rather than getting branded as developers incapable of writing a good story or characters without having to rely heavily on Sapkowski's work.It is hard to predict what future CDPR games will be like, but it is not unheard of that a previously successful brand name is dropped by a developer (e.g. Half-Life by Valve - they did not even bother to finish the story). This could happen if the new games - CP2077 and whatever that other AAA RPG title until 2021 is going to be - prove to be even more successful than the Witcher series. In that case, releasing a Witcher sequel after a long time (possibly ~10 years) might not look so attractive after all. Also, many fans may be more attached to the developers - or, more specifically, how they make their games - than a particular brand name, that is probably why for example Fallout 3 was successful after Oblivion, even though it is in a completely different universe. I am not saying that CP2077 will necessarily be "Witcher with guns", but it will likely show a similar approach to storytelling and game design, and will generally have similar strengths to the Witcher games. Thus, chances are that a fair percentage of those who liked The Witcher will also like Cyberpunk, and even more of them would like a fantasy RPG by CDPR even if it is not in the Witcher universe.
Last edited:
I definitely do not think a lot of customization is a good idea. I am not looking for anything Skyrim-like (dear god, no). If we end up having a set protagonist, I think it should go like this:
- We get to choose the appearance. This wouldn't affect the story in any way but would still please a lot of players.
- We get at least a bit more freedom in deciding the character's personality and ideals than we did in the trilogy. I wouldn't want to play Geralt 2.0, personality wise. And this would actually provide more freedom in terms of stories that can be told: there wouldn't be any weird cases like TW2, where Geralt has little to no reason to care about any of the political drama that makes up the bulk of the story.
- No name selection. Character should use a default name. Choosing the name doesn't add anything substantial and, like you said, makes the story more impersonal.
- The character should have a set background, or a few set backgrounds we can choose from a la Dragon Age: Origins. No generic, blank slate background like in Bethesda games. Here we can get exactly the same as with a pre-defined character, but with some extra player input. It's an all around better choice.
- No race or class selection. Playing a witcher would be drastically different from playing anything else, both gameplay and lore-wise. Same with being a human or an elf.
- Allow players to choose the character's gender, if possible. This would be the most difficult part, since NPCs ought to react differently to a female PC. A female witcher might also take some more background explanation. But in the end, it is a choice a lot of people would appreciate and it would be interesting. As for the character's name, they can either record a different one for each gender or, if they're smart, they'll just a choose one that's gender neutral.
It's not that I doubt that they're good enough to make a new character; it's that I think it's a wasted effort. Love it or hate him, Geralt was not even close to the most interesting character in the game, and he didn't need to be. A custom character can still have a compelling background and personality, if pulled off well.CDPR could also write a history for the new character themselves. I think they are competent enough to be able to create someone at least as good and interesting as Eskel.
But as I said, I want to see how CP2077 turns out before giving my final opinion on this matter.
I chose multiple characters because I was thinking about a heavily story-driven game similiar to Heavy Rain or telltale games where you control several main characters and make decisions that effect the story so drastically that some of your controlled characters can even die without a game over. Made with CD Projects unique and loving touch.
Because lets face it; Geralt was pretty untouchable as a character and had a plot armor any dude from Game of Thrones would envy. It closed some doors from the writers of Witcher games because you could never make anything happen to Geralt that would prevent him from proceeding to the next adventure.
Similar to some chapters in the Witcher books where sometimes the focus would shift to several other characters than Geralt, so could the next Witcher game be more about the less dramatic characters than witchers caught up in events much larger than themselves.
In a time of madness and disdain that the WItcher franchise is so good at telling stories about.
For example, lets imagine the next Witcher game would be called, say, Time of the Sword and Axe or something. It would be set in a war between Nilfgaard and Northern realms.
In such a game one of the characters could be some minor noble in Verden or even a bastard brother of the king. He would be sent to Brokilon to negotiate with lady Eithne of the dryads because he would somehow be carrying the blood of the dryads or otherwise be considered their kin (yes rather cliche I know, but I'm just throwing ideas that pop randomly in my head). Some setting like that could immediately open up new fresh stories CD Project could tell about in perspectives you simply couldnt do with Geralt.
But you would play as that character only at some of the time.
Other characters you would play as could be very diverse croup. Nilfgaardian officer stationed in Cintra who would also be working with secret orders from Vattier Rideux, (similar to Cahir) Redenian volunteer who would find a old witcher sword by accident and use it cut down enemies in massive battles where you fight for your survival more than you do for your love for country, daughter of a baron in Maribor whose baron father would be slowly dying and it would be up to you to decide how much your fathers power you would try to gather and decide would you bow along with your castle before the approaching Nilfgaardian invaders or would you try to oppose them. Student from the future in Nilfgaardian academy trying to learn about the historical war with the North, Elven woman from Dol Blathanna trying to bring as many scattered Scoiatel elfs to safety as possible and so on and so on. You surely get what I'm trying to say already.
Like in Telltale games (only better of course) the story would constantly progress regardless of what decisions you would make or what successes or failures you would cause. Everyone dying would be one possible ending in itself.
:eredin:
Because lets face it; Geralt was pretty untouchable as a character and had a plot armor any dude from Game of Thrones would envy. It closed some doors from the writers of Witcher games because you could never make anything happen to Geralt that would prevent him from proceeding to the next adventure.
Similar to some chapters in the Witcher books where sometimes the focus would shift to several other characters than Geralt, so could the next Witcher game be more about the less dramatic characters than witchers caught up in events much larger than themselves.
In a time of madness and disdain that the WItcher franchise is so good at telling stories about.
For example, lets imagine the next Witcher game would be called, say, Time of the Sword and Axe or something. It would be set in a war between Nilfgaard and Northern realms.
In such a game one of the characters could be some minor noble in Verden or even a bastard brother of the king. He would be sent to Brokilon to negotiate with lady Eithne of the dryads because he would somehow be carrying the blood of the dryads or otherwise be considered their kin (yes rather cliche I know, but I'm just throwing ideas that pop randomly in my head). Some setting like that could immediately open up new fresh stories CD Project could tell about in perspectives you simply couldnt do with Geralt.
But you would play as that character only at some of the time.
Other characters you would play as could be very diverse croup. Nilfgaardian officer stationed in Cintra who would also be working with secret orders from Vattier Rideux, (similar to Cahir) Redenian volunteer who would find a old witcher sword by accident and use it cut down enemies in massive battles where you fight for your survival more than you do for your love for country, daughter of a baron in Maribor whose baron father would be slowly dying and it would be up to you to decide how much your fathers power you would try to gather and decide would you bow along with your castle before the approaching Nilfgaardian invaders or would you try to oppose them. Student from the future in Nilfgaardian academy trying to learn about the historical war with the North, Elven woman from Dol Blathanna trying to bring as many scattered Scoiatel elfs to safety as possible and so on and so on. You surely get what I'm trying to say already.
Like in Telltale games (only better of course) the story would constantly progress regardless of what decisions you would make or what successes or failures you would cause. Everyone dying would be one possible ending in itself.
:eredin:
Last edited:
I like the idea of multiple characters to explore several sides of a new story (and possibly new setting like part of the Empire in the south). Multiple characters also allow for several different playstyles: one could be a witcher (possibly Viper School or a young witcher trained by someone like Eskel), one could be a mage, and one could be something altogether different like a higher vampire.
A witcher character would play very much like Geralt, with perhaps a few flourishes from a school other than the Wolf. A Viper school witcher for example might have extra training with poisoned daggers- both the throwing variety and the close-quarters fighting sort, or with spears that give him a longer reach. Other skills and abilities could follow the same basic pattern as Geralt's with a mix of adrenaline, magic, and alchemy. In the course of the story the Witcher character would make ue of "Witcher senses" and forensic skills much like those we see in Witcher 3.
A mage character could have an interesting mix of fighting styles. In Witcher 3 there are three varieties of mage combat present. First is the open-hand elemental spellcasting used by Keira, Triss, Yen, and Philippa; second is the staff-based combat demonstrated by Ermion; and third is the Ofieri mage's wind-based magic seen in Hearts of Stone. Ermion's style with the staff as a primary weapon and heavy use of telekinetic blasts would be the most likely starting point. Dodging and evasion for a mage character might resemble Ciri's blink ability, and there would probably some sort of shield spell similar to the alternate quen sign.
For story elements of the game, a mage character would employ a very different skill-set than a witcher. Divination, mind-reading, and illusions could all come into play. The character might also have to construct gadgets like megascopes to accomplish certain tasks. In the books Yennefer had to borrow an exceptionally large diamond for her megascope in Skellige, and I could see a heist-style quest where the player has to steal a large gemstone for a complicated megascope operation.
A nonhuman character opens up many different possibilities for gameplay mechanics. My preference would be a higher vampire because we have now seen them in action with Blood and Wine. Playing as a vampire might get complicated because the character might not want to be recognized as a vampire. For certain parts of the story and game world the vampire would try to appear like a human- using human weapons and methods while others are watching. Then in secret the character could employ vampire tricks- turning into mist to pass through a door or flying around as a giant bat. Stealth could play a big role in the vampire's part of the story, along with special abilities like hypnosis and the ability to use ravens as spies. Vampire combat could have two distinct modes: "incognito mode" using human weapons with inhuman speed, and "fangs mode" with Detlaff-style claws and movement.
Having multiple characters also allows for a demographic mix. Witchers are typically male, but a mage or vampire could easily be female. Culturally, you might have a southern Viper school witcher, a northern Koviri mage, and a vampire from anywhere you like.
A witcher character would play very much like Geralt, with perhaps a few flourishes from a school other than the Wolf. A Viper school witcher for example might have extra training with poisoned daggers- both the throwing variety and the close-quarters fighting sort, or with spears that give him a longer reach. Other skills and abilities could follow the same basic pattern as Geralt's with a mix of adrenaline, magic, and alchemy. In the course of the story the Witcher character would make ue of "Witcher senses" and forensic skills much like those we see in Witcher 3.
A mage character could have an interesting mix of fighting styles. In Witcher 3 there are three varieties of mage combat present. First is the open-hand elemental spellcasting used by Keira, Triss, Yen, and Philippa; second is the staff-based combat demonstrated by Ermion; and third is the Ofieri mage's wind-based magic seen in Hearts of Stone. Ermion's style with the staff as a primary weapon and heavy use of telekinetic blasts would be the most likely starting point. Dodging and evasion for a mage character might resemble Ciri's blink ability, and there would probably some sort of shield spell similar to the alternate quen sign.
For story elements of the game, a mage character would employ a very different skill-set than a witcher. Divination, mind-reading, and illusions could all come into play. The character might also have to construct gadgets like megascopes to accomplish certain tasks. In the books Yennefer had to borrow an exceptionally large diamond for her megascope in Skellige, and I could see a heist-style quest where the player has to steal a large gemstone for a complicated megascope operation.
A nonhuman character opens up many different possibilities for gameplay mechanics. My preference would be a higher vampire because we have now seen them in action with Blood and Wine. Playing as a vampire might get complicated because the character might not want to be recognized as a vampire. For certain parts of the story and game world the vampire would try to appear like a human- using human weapons and methods while others are watching. Then in secret the character could employ vampire tricks- turning into mist to pass through a door or flying around as a giant bat. Stealth could play a big role in the vampire's part of the story, along with special abilities like hypnosis and the ability to use ravens as spies. Vampire combat could have two distinct modes: "incognito mode" using human weapons with inhuman speed, and "fangs mode" with Detlaff-style claws and movement.
Having multiple characters also allows for a demographic mix. Witchers are typically male, but a mage or vampire could easily be female. Culturally, you might have a southern Viper school witcher, a northern Koviri mage, and a vampire from anywhere you like.
While I DO agree with a number of things you said, two stuck out, to me, like sore thumbs.
"Geralt 2.0": I responded to this concept a couple times a page or two back. You might consider checking it out. Sorry...I'm far too lazy to link to it or rewrite it.
"female Witchers: Oh, please no. Nothing could be more lore breaking. This is the ultimate form of "pandering". It's one of the very few things C.D.P.R. could do that would lead to me not buying the game.
Take it you're not a fan of the
Ciri as Witcheress
I know this will never happen, but I've always thought it would be a fun idea to have a fourth game that centers around the adventures of Lambert and Keira Metz. That would make for some salty and hilarious repartee. Maybe even have them take a detour to Corvo Bianco and let Geralt pop in for a cameo. One can dream. One can dream ...
I actually didn't mind the Ciri as Witcheress ending. It made sense with-in the canon of the books and games, even though she didn't actually become a true Witcheress. I'd allow her to be the exception.Take it you're not a fan of theending thenCiri as Witcheress
I know this will never happen, but I've always thought it would be a fun idea to have a fourth game that centers around the adventures of Lambert and Keira Metz. That would make for some salty and hilarious repartee. Maybe even have them take a detour to Corvo Bianco and let Geralt pop in for a cameo. One can dream. One can dream ...
Also, kudos for spelling it correctly. It's "Witcheress" for women, not "Witcher". People seem to struggle with that one.
Yeah...Eskel, Lambert/Keira, and young Vesemir would all make for awesome protagonists (Especially the first two.), even if they're probably never going to happen due to being to connected to Geralt.
:what2::confusion::wondering::silence::nice:
For the win!
ciri as witcheress is ok for the tw3 ending, but not for protagonist for another game, nor any other character from tw trilogy, if it's not geralt, then it must be a custom character, through character creation we can make our own witcher, choose school as class, etc
but male only, for there are no female witchers
but male only, for there are no female witchers
See, I think that is equally problematic. I mean, any Witcher that we play is going to pale in comparison to Geralt. He's The White fucking Wolf
Thousands of pages and hundreds of hours of gaming have taught us that he is at the pinnacle of his profession, that all other Witchers pale in comparison to him. I really doubt that some generic, customizeable character which I make is going to match up to that. I still think the only way forward for this franchise is to branch out, to experiment with other protagonists that are not Witchers. Hence why I also recommended that any future game not be titled "Witcher." It's fine to continue working in Sapkowski's universe, but there are other stories out there worth telling that have nothing to do with Witchering.With that attitude, the next Witcher will DEFINITELY pale in comparison.See, I think that is equally problematic. I mean, any Witcher that we play is going to pale in comparison to Geralt. He's The White fucking Wolf
Factually incorrect. Eskel is his equal in sword-fighting, and even Geralt has admitted that there are swordsmen better than him (Honestly can't remember where.). The other Witchers (That we know of.) only pale in comparison to him due to his deeds, not due to his strengths. The next Witcher-protagonist's deeds might make Geralt look like a chump.
The next Witcher-protagonist doesn't have to be generic or customization. Why can't he be awesome, like the book characters, or any of the other character's C.D.P.R. has created? If you really doubt that C.D.P.R. can't make an awesome and amazing character, after everything they've put out, then I'm quite surprised.
Not only is that not the only option, but it's also one of the least likely (Due to popular opinion.).
---------- Updated at 11:14 PM ----------
Additionally:
With the logic than any future Witchers will pale in comparison to Geralt, and not be able to live up to his legacy, I believe that all sorcerers will pale in comparison to Vilgefortz, all sorceresses will pale in comparison to Yennefer, all nobility will pale in comparison to the Bloody Baron, all soldiers will pale in comparison to Roche, and all horses will pale in comparison to Roach. All vampires with pale in comparison to Regis, all monsters will pale in comparison to the Crones, and all antagonists will pale in comparison to...well, that's quite a list.
Continuing on with that logic, C.D.P.R. shouldn't even attempt creating any of those sorts of characters. They won't live up to our expectations. TW4 should star a donkey as the protagonist.
Wait...no! There's that donkey in the Land of a Thousand Fables that kicks you! No donkey could ever live up to him. :lol:
C.D.P.R. can create some absolutely amazing characters. I'm sure that the can create a Witcher that we love just as much, if not more, than Geralt of Rivia. I trust them enough to say that with an abundance of confidence.
That kind of game design doesn't work in my opinion, though. Bioware does the same thing with their protagonists, at least that's the way it feels with the Dragon Age series. In the first game you play as the Warden, the slayer of the menacing Dark Spawn hoard, the savior of the world, etc etc etc. Then the third game comes along and they have to trump the previous protagonists, so they create the mighty Inquisition. You thought you were a bad ass before? Think again! This time you will command armies, kings will bow before you, and the woman that you romanced in the first game? Now she's your lapdog, carrying out the wishes of this new clandestine organization!
I don't want a fourth game that trivializes Geralt's accomplishments and makes me feel like all of the hours which I spent playing as him was merely a stepping stone to the "new hotness."
I was specifically referencing what @cyberpunkforever said when he/she stated, "if it's not geralt, then it must be a custom character." It's not CDPR's abilities that I doubt, but rather mine
I don't like customizeable characters because I never feel vested in them, and I prefer it when the developer creates the backstory for protagonists. How exactly do you judge what the "popular opinion" is? By reading this forum, visiting gaming websites and places like Reddit? No offense, but over six million people bought Wild Hunt in its first couple weeks of release. I don't think it's possible for any of us to really gauge how consumers would respond to a less traditional protagonist. Also, if CDPR were only to cater to popular opinion (by that I take it you mean the communis opinio on this forum), they wouldn't be making CP 2077. They would be churning out a third, fourth, and fifth expansion to Wild Hunt, then direct their attention to Red Kit 2, then an Enhanced Edition of Wild Hunt.
There's no "right" or "wrong" in that. It's your opinion, and I respect it, but I must disagree.
You put face into them for TW3, didn't you? I'd suggest you to it again for TW4 (If it ever even happens.). They rarely disappoint. I mean...these guys created the greatest video game of all time.I was specifically referencing what @cyberpunkforever said when he/she stated, "if it's not geralt, then it must be a custom character." It's not CDPR's abilities that I doubt, but rather mine
I think when the vast majority of people across a number of websites show a want for a future Witcher as the protagonist, and/or a dislike of the concept of having a non-Witcher, that's fairly indicative of the public's thoughts. And, keep in mind what most people are fans of this game for...Witchers. They are the unique aspect of the game's universe. Everything else is an amalgamation of all of the famous fantasy worlds and folk tales, or is common throughout other works. For example, there are a ton of games that let you play as a sorcerer, a soldier, a knight, etc. (The things that you mentioned, previously.). How many let you play as a Witcher? The series' lore isn't what makes it specially. It's the series' protagonist; the Witchers.
True, minus the "churning out" sequels bit, which is something the community is fairly equally divided on.
If there does happen to be another Witcher game after TW3, I'll bet my money on it being about Ciri. I love Eskel and Lambert, but I don't see them as protagonist material. If we could get a fully-fledged game about Ciri 3-8 years after the plot of TW3, with all of the same features of TW3 and more, then it would be my dream come true.
And I think it could work with the multiple endings of TW3. The game could begin differently depending on TW3 save data but still follow the same storyline.
Still, Geralt's been such a mainstay of the series that it's hard to imagine it without him. But I think TW3 laid the perfect foundation for a potential Ciri game.
And I think it could work with the multiple endings of TW3. The game could begin differently depending on TW3 save data but still follow the same storyline.
For example:
- The Empress ending could start with Ciri disgraced from the royal court, never having taken up the title of Nilfgaardian Imperator. Perhaps Emhyr died and she lost influence. Instead Voorhis claimed the throne. Maybe she gave it up willingly, maybe not. Either way, she's on the Path now.
- The 'Dead Ciri' ending could start with her estranged from Geralt (and by extension Yennefer, Triss, et cetera) but still following the Path of her own volition.
Still, Geralt's been such a mainstay of the series that it's hard to imagine it without him. But I think TW3 laid the perfect foundation for a potential Ciri game.
Last edited:
I'm only like... 3% into the game so I don't know how all of it comes to close but I kind of like the idea of a custom character in The Witcher universe. I also love Ciri. These are really cool ideas.
Is this what you're talking about?While I DO agree with a number of things you said, two stuck out, to me, like sore thumbs.
"Geralt 2.0": I responded to this concept a couple times a page or two back. You might consider checking it out. Sorry...I'm far too lazy to link to it or rewrite it.
I agree it's probably an unfounded fear. Like you've said, there are plenty of witchers that are not like Geralt, and I doubt CDPR will make the bad move of reproducing Geralt. Still, it's good to be prepared for the worst, right?
Maybe I am just ignorant, since I'm still reading the books and I'm not quite familiar with all the details of the lore. So I assure you, this is a genuine question: why would it be so lore breaking? I am not aware of anything that makes female witchers more implausible than female knights. I mean, some people are talking about having Ciri as a protagonist; how is this different?
It would definitely have to be explained in-game, and it would have to be addressed where pertinent (so quite a few times). Maybe that alone makes it not worth the cost, but I wouldn't be the best judge of that. You will have noticed I put that option last — that's because it is the one I'm less sure off and, I'm aware, the one we're less likely to see. If so, I won't be overly broken up about it.
---------- Updated at 12:32 AM ----------
Aren't you contradicting yourself a little? First you say you do not want another witcher as he cannot possibly live up to Geralt, implying that you don't want to play anyone "lesser" than Geralt. And then you turn around and say that you do not want to play as anyone "greater" either.
I don't think a new protagonist has to outdo Geralt. He can just be his own person. For example, let's say we got to play as a witcher from the Cat or Viper schools who was a Letho-like figure e.g. more of a hitman than a monster slayer by the time the story takes place. I consider that type of character to be different enough from Geralt while still remaining a witcher. Not saying they would have to do that or even go that far; just trying to show that there is more than one angle to the witcher identity than the one Geralt shows.
I don't know if this appeals to you at all, but what I enjoy about (well done) customizable characters is the feeling of shared authorship. I certainly felt vested in and still remember fondly my bitter, egotistical mage or my thuggish but family centered dwarf from Origins. And it worked because I did feel like I had a hand in defining the character while keeping said character as a part of the universe rather than a player insert that just dropped out of the sky(rim).I was specifically referencing what @cyberpunkforever said when he/she stated, "if it's not geralt, then it must be a custom character." It's not CDPR's abilities that I doubt, but rather mine
There was some of that going on with Geralt, and I certainly enjoyed playing as him. If they made a replacement, there's no saying I would not enjoy it just as much. It's just that I'd like them to try their hand at a custom character. Maybe they'll get the hang of it better than other companies.
I don't think I can stress this enough. Witchers are really what makes the universe unique. I don't think playing as a mage, an elven rebel or a soldier would be all that different in another fantasy setting.