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.
The Witcheress ending is by default. So no matter what, you're jump-started to the main events of the game, with the same basic outcomes regardless of your TW3 ending: Voorhis is Emperor, Geralt is retired, Ciri is on the Path. Just an idea.
- 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.
So, all of our original trilogy decisions would be rendered meaningless? Regardless of whether or not she becomes a Witcheress, she becomes the Empress of Nilfgaard, or presumably dies, she'll end up going through the plot of TW4? That sounds like a super weak plot device.
---------- Updated at 01:01 AM ----------
Some very good points, there.Snipped!
Regarding female Witchers:
The Witcher mutagens/trials were developed many hundreds of years ago by two sorcerers (Cosimo Malaspina and his apprentice, Alzur.). Knowing that men are [physically] the superior sex, they created those potions and elexirs to target a man's body. Doing so for women would have led to Witcheresses who couldn't ever compete with their male counter-parts [physically], and would have taken time away from their work on establishing the Witcher order(s), so they never did it. Now that the formula for the males is lost, and there's nobody left to recreate those, there's also nobody left to create the process for women (Besides the fact that there's also no upside in doing so.).
It's also mentioned that there are only male Witchers (Both in the books, and in the games, on many occasions.).
I mean, C.D.P.R. COULD force female protagonist into the game, and have part of TW4's updated lore include something like "Oh, we found a way to make Witcheresses.", but that's what you'd call "pandering", which, in this instance, would be the forced inclusion of certain groups into the game just to appease those groups. It's a cheap, garbage tactic.
Witchers are all-male. Period. As much as certain groups of people (Who have no respect for a game's lore, and only want to achieve certain quotas.) hate the thought of that, it's simply how it is.
That doesn't go to say that Witcher's can't belong to other groups, such as ethnic minorities or homosexuals (There's nothing to suggest that Witcher's can't be the latter.). The two nations in the East (Haakland and Zerrikania.) are almost exclusively non-white, and are rumored to have Witchers. The same could probably be said for the many nations "across the sea". But, I wouldn't want to see Witchers from those areas as protagonist unless it takes place in that area. And, if that were the case, I wouldn't want to see Witchers from the West (The Northern Kingdoms and Nilfgaard.). I may have made that unnecessarily confusing.
You feel me, though?
---------- Updated at 01:04 AM ----------
Also, moderators, if that last post was too political, please don't delete it. I ask that you tell me what you want gone, and I'll surgically remove it without compromising the rest of the post.