Reasonable Suggestions for an Enhanced Edition of The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt.

[CTPhipps]

The ending could have been Ciri is now able to train her skills in relative safety and begins honing them so she can one day stop the White Frost and pay off her debt to Avallac'h (make the White Frost a threat only to Tir Na Lia instead of the whole galaxy space time). Then she goes off exploring the world as a witcheress until she feels she's ready.
Or in the Empress ending she dedicates herself to this world, leaves Tir Na Lia to it's fate while slowly shaping the kingdoms, now all part of the empire, into a better place.

Eh, the problem with that is I think the game is trying to tell us that Ciri is not Geralt's little girl anymore and is a badass. The Wild Hunt isn't supposed to be afraid of Geralt.

In the end, they should be afraid of HER.

Kind of like if Star Wars ended with Obi-Wan Kenobi blowing up the Death Star.

---------- Updated at 07:00 PM ----------

Somehow whenever I think about "What happened inside the White Frost?" I can't help but picture Ciri having a conversation with Ghostchild.

Imo just leave the entire thing alone and let's never talk about it again >_>

White Frost: You may choose the Blue ending where you kill all of the elves in the universe along with Dandelion.

Ciri: Wait, what?

White Frost: This is the happy ending. Then you may choose the evil-ish Red ending where you don't commit genocide.

Ciri: Oh good.

White Frost: This is where you become Empress of the Universe by merging with the White Frost and dominating all planets with the power of cold.

Ciri: What.the.hell.

White Frost: Then there is the Green ending where you merge the White Frost, Humans, and Elves into one species because Humans and Elves and Ice Monsters cannot live together in peace.

Ciri: That's a horrible idea. Also stupid. Can I just punch you?

White Frost: No, then I'll kill everyone in the universe.

Ciri: Screw it, I'm getting some mods.

White Frost: FINE! BE THAT WAY! You can forget about getting your own game now! We'll have some unnamed generic sexless NPC be the protagonist! The players can make their own character and he'll have generic good, evil, and noncommittal dialogue yet everyone will act like he's the messiah!

Ciri: *flips him off*

 

[Scholdarr.452]

Eh, the problem with that is I think the game is trying to tell us that Ciri is not Geralt's little girl anymore and is a badass. The Wild Hunt isn't supposed to be afraid of Geralt.

Why does you equal "grown up" with "badass" all the time? What's so hard with just being a more or less normal (still powerful, but kind of normal) human being? I don't get why Ciri must suddenly be the master of the universe. It's stupid.

In the end, they should be afraid of HER.

No, why? The Wild Hunt shouldn't be afraid of anyone. And in fact, they aren't.

Kind of like if Star Wars ended with Obi-Wan Kenobi blowing up the Death Star.

Ahem, no, not at all. First, Ciri is not Geralt's disciple in a traditional way. Second, the game is NOT about Ciri's story but about Geralt's. Third, in the game you follow somebody's POV (Geralt's) while in the movie you follow a storyline from the outset. Forth, just because Star Wars is good doesn't mean that Witcher had to follow its storyline and motives 1to1.

 

[Zbotz]

NOOOOOO I said let's never talk about that :crybaby::crybaby:

 

[CTPhipps]

Why does you equal "grown up" with "badass" all the time? What's so hard with just being a more or less normal (still powerful, but kind of normal) human being? I don't get why Ciri must suddenly be the master of the universe. It's stupid.

Because she IS a badass. It's not the case of grown up=badass. It's the fact Ciri is the other half of the Sword of Destiny. It's not EVERYONE should be badass but CIRI should be badass.

No, why? The Wild Hunt shouldn't be afraid of anyone. And in fact, they aren't.

Then they're stupid.

The Wild Hunt has bullied, tormented, and abused Ciri too long.

Now they need to be exterminated so the next ten generations of them whisper in fear about Ciri.

Ahem, no, not at all. First, Ciri is not Geralt's disciple in a traditional way. Second, the game is NOT about Ciri's story but about Geralt's. Third, in the game you follow somebody's POV (Geralt's) while in the movie you follow a storyline from the outset. Forth, just because Star Wars is good doesn't mean that Witcher had to follow its storyline and motives 1to1.

1. Geralt adopted her and taught her the ways of being a WItcher. That is VERY DEFINITION of being a disciple. We see it in the intro.

2. Yeah, I disagree. It's a game about them both.

3. You have Ciri AND Geralt's POV.

4. It doesn't matter either way, because if Ciri DOESN'T have her moment in the sun I think it would make the Enhanced Edition WORSE than the original game. So much so I wouldn't play it.

Edit:

On a serious note, I don't think we're ever going to come to an agreement if your viewpoint of the game shouldn't be Ciri coming into her own as Geralt's equal or superior as co-star of the game.

 

[Scholdarr.452]

Because she IS a badass. It's not the case of grown up=badass. It's the fact Ciri is the other half of the Sword of Destiny. It's not EVERYONE should be badass but CIRI should be badass.

I fundamentally disagree. She shouldn't be badass at all. Making her so at any costs is one of the biggest flaws of the game.

he Wild Hunt has bullied, tormented, and abused Ciri too long.

They never abused or tormented her so far.

Now they need to be exterminated so the next ten generations of them whisper in fear about Ciri.

What?

1. Geralt adopted her and taught her the ways of being a WItcher. That is VERY DEFINITION of being a disciple. We see it in the intro.

Nope, actually not. He actually just trained her how to fight. That's about it. She learnt way more things from Yennefer about being a mage and using magic. And about being a woman. In no way the relationship between Ciri and Geralt is the typcial disciple trope like in Kung Fu movies - or Star Wars - in which the padawn naturally have to be better than the former master...

2. Yeah, I disagree. It's a game about them both.

And yet, you want Ciri to be the master of the universe and be "better" than Geralt.

3. You have Ciri AND Geralt's POV.

Nope, not really. The few passages in which we control Ciri are actually pretty linear (there is not one real choice in it) and they are just tales about her action Geralt hears from other persons like the Red Baron. What Ciri does in the game is actually how Geralt imagines her actions in his head while listening to the the tales about her. So it's not a real POV in Ciri's case. And that's also a pretty good reason why we shouldn't be able to control her directly in the end of the game...

4. It doesn't matter either way, because if Ciri DOESN'T have her moment in the sun I think it would make the Enhanced Edition WORSE than the original game. So much so I wouldn't play it.

I don't understand that at all tbh. But I guess you want this game to be about Ciri and about her being a badass (for whatever reason) at all costs, no matter if it's logical, consistent or supported by the whole idea of the franchise or game. You just want it that way and that's about it...

On a serious note, I don't think we're ever going to come to an agreement if your viewpoint of the game shouldn't be Ciri coming into her own as Geralt's equal or superior as co-star of the game.

Maybe because my definition of being equal has actually little to do with being a hero and doing magical, powerful things...

What I can't accept are logical inconsistencies and bad storyteling. And most of the passages that are about Ciri in TW3 are hurt by both, especially the ones later in the game.

 

[CTPhipps]

I fundamentally disagree. She shouldn't be badass at all. Making her so at any costs is one of the biggest flaws of the game.

Yeah, we are on opposite ends of this.

They never abused or tormented her so far.

Chasing her, terrifying her, cursing her, and killing her friends seems to be a pretty clear example of abuse and torment.

What?

If the game failed at characterizing them as anything but generic evil, they at least succeeded in me wanting to see the Aen Elle crushed and ground to dust for threatening Ciri.

I really enjoyed killing every Wild Hunt soldier I did.

Which is how it should be with an effective villain.

Maybe because my definition of being equal has actually little to do with being a hero and doing magical, powerful things

I think this argument fails if you don't think Geralt should retire and take up diplomacy, priestwork, or knitting.

Ciri is a Witcher.

It's who she is.

Empress or not.

Hence she slays monsters. Hence she does big and important stuff like saving innocents and fighting evil.

I also don't devalue Yennefer's relationship to Geralt but, if Ciri had to choose, I'm pretty sure she'd choose Geralt. Thankfully, she doesn't have to.

Nope, not really. The few passages in which we control Ciri are actually pretty linear (there is not one real choice in it) and they are just tales about her action Geralt hears from other persons like the Red Baron. What Ciri does in the game is actually how Geralt imagines her actions in his head while listening to the the tales about her. So it's not a real POV in Ciri's case. And that's also a pretty good reason why we shouldn't be able to control her directly in the end of the game...

I, honestly, think of those as my favorite parts of the game. I also think the fact we don't play Ciri in the last part is one of the least enjoyable parts of the game because after playing Ciri for numerous sections where she's awesome, we don't get to see her biggest moment in the Sun.

I don't understand that at all tbh. But I guess you want this game to be about Ciri and about her being a badass (for whatever reason) at all costs, no matter if it's logical, consistent or supported by the whole idea of the franchise or game. You just want it that way and that's about it...

Ciri has been badass since she survived the Dryad's potion with her memory intact, since she slew the Wyvern in Thanedd's market, and since she survived in a desert on her own. She's a character who is tough and a survivor. She's the first female Witcher, the Witcheress, and the Sword of Destiny's other edge.

This is logical, consistent, and ABSOLUTELY supported by the books and game.

Where do you even get the idea she SHOUDLN'T be? No, seriously, I want to know what your opinion of Ciri is and what she should be. Because it's so far removed of my conception of Ciri and what the games' conception of, I can't really understand it.

 

[UndiscoveredAdv]

Ciri has been badass since she survived the Dryad's potion with her memory intact, since she slew the Wyvern in Thanedd's market, and since she survived in a desert on her own. She's a character who is tough and a survivor. She's the first female Witcher, the Witcheress, and the Sword of Destiny's other edge.

This is logical, consistent, and ABSOLUTELY supported by the books and game.

Well said! Ciri is the definition of badass Imo!

 

[Scholdarr.452]

Chasing her, terrifying her, cursing her, and killing her friends seems to be a pretty clear example of abuse and torment.

None of that is torture or abuse...just saying.

And they didn't curse her, they cursed Avallac'h. And which friends did they kill? The only one I could think of is Skjall and that's hardly a friend given the fact that she only knew him for about 2 hours or so...

If the game failed at characterizing them as anything but generic evil, they at least succeeded in me wanting to see the Aen Elle crushed and ground to dust for threatening Ciri.

I see. But I don't see how that has anything to do with them fearing either Ciri or Geralt...

I think this argument fails if you don't think Geralt should retire and take up diplomacy, priestwork, or knitting.

I'm not sure if you actually understood my argument in the first place. Geralt is not defined by his job but by his character and how he acts. Being a witcher is just what he does. It's not who he is. He acts more than once (actually all the time) against his witcher codex because deep inside he can't get along with injustice, with all the bad that happens in the world. That's who he really is. That's the core of his humanity. It's what makes him a person and an "adult". His personality is the sum of his believings, feelings and wishes. It's not his profession although we in the modern world tend to equal that.

When I talk about Ciri growing up I don't mean her getting physically stronger or becoming a badass. I mean that she grows up in character. That she makes her own decisions, gets her own view on the world, challenge her believings and get a "better" person while doing so. That's what means growing up to me and how I would like it depicted in the game. In the end, not fighting against somebody is an act of heroism but the decision to do so. The decisions we make every day define our character. What we do is only the result of that and we might even fail. Failing is no problem. We can fail and still be grown up and "strong". Coming to a strong position in mind and defending your principles and the stuff you believe in, fighting for what you think is just and right, fighting against your fear and every sin that wants to seduce you every day, that's my depiction of a strong and grown up character. You don't have to be a badass, saving the whole universe, in order to be so. That's imo just a childish trope and an bland exaggeration of the concept.

I also don't devalue Yennefer's relationship to Geralt but, if Ciri had to choose, I'm pretty sure she'd choose Geralt. Thankfully, she doesn't have to.

I don't see how that is connected to our discussion tbh...

I, honestly, think of those as my favorite parts of the game. I also think the fact we don't play Ciri in the last part is one of the least enjoyable parts of the game because after playing Ciri for numerous sections where she's awesome, we don't get to see her biggest moment in the Sun.

Nothing wrong with that. I've enjoyed them as well. But to me it seems that you just want more Ciri, no matter what. It's not really important to you if it fits the story or if its logical, believable and consistent as long as you get more Ciri...

Ciri has been badass since she survived the Dryad's potion with her memory intact, since she slew the Wyvern in Thanedd's market, and since she survived in a desert on her own. She's a character who is tough and a survivor. She's the first female Witcher, the Witcheress, and the Sword of Destiny's other edge.

This is logical, consistent, and ABSOLUTELY supported by the books and game.

You know the term "spectacle creep"? That's exactly the case here. It's a long, long, LONG way from surviving in a desert to saving the whole universe at a rainy afternoon. So in no way the books support that. And the logical connection isn't apparent neither. Ciri is strong willed. Agreed. That doesn't mean that she has super powers and that certainly doesn't mean that the storyline in TW3 just magically becomes consistent and well established just because she is tough and strong willed.

Spectacle creep is actually a pretty bad thing. It it's a common flaw in video games (and in other media), especialy in sequels...

Where do you even get the idea she SHOUDLN'T be? No, seriously, I want to know what your opinion of Ciri is and what she should be. Because it's so far removed of my conception of Ciri and what the games' conception of, I can't really understand it.

I don't understand. You only have to read my suggestion post to understand that. And maybe the passage I've written above. Maybe it's a misunderstanding of the term "badass". I have nothing against a powerful, strong willed Ciri who is tough. I see her in the very same light. What I don't want is over-the-top badassery following video gamey rules instead of believable and sophisticated storytelling. CDPR is better than that. At least I thought so before TW3...

 

[CTPhipps]

Well, I guess we may be talking circles around oneself since I mentioned that instead of killing the White Frost, I would have been happy with Ciri killing Eredin.

 

[Scholdarr.452]

Well, I guess we may be talking circles around oneself since I mentioned that instead of killing the White Frost, I would have been happy with Ciri killing Eredin.

I would have been happy with her killing nobody...

But yeah, we're going in circles...

 

[LiarOnElmstreet]

YES!!! to everthing! Every last point! Thank you for summing it up!

Or in other Words: Let me RolePLAY! You're not writing a book, but a game!

 

[CTPhipps]

Well, moving on:

Some problems I do see with an Enhanced Edition are as follows:

1. A Post-Game Mode Is Impossible: At least in the context of setting everything after the main game. A lot of the sidequests are tied to specific events in the game like Nilfgaard's invasion or specific character issues. All of these become nonsensical if played after the war is over. Likewise, you'd have to change all of the banners and troops and so on when wandering around the land.

Also, you'd need everyone to have different reactions based on everything which might or might not have happened. This would be a MAMMOTH overhaul and I don't think it'd have improved the game all that much to be honest. I'm content with no just having the characters not disappear personally.

2. Is this better than working on other projects: Like Expansions for the Game or possibly a spin-off?

3. Some problems are structural: You don't like the way certain characters went or stories or adventures? There's not much that can be done about that.

---------- Updated at 08:51 PM ----------

YES!!! to everthing! Every last point! Thank you for summing it up!

Or in other Words: Let me RolePLAY! You're not writing a book, but a game!

I'm glad you like my suggestions (presuming you're talking to me).

 

[LiarOnElmstreet]

Well, moving on:

Some problems I do see with an Enhanced Edition are as follows:

1. A Post-Game Mode Is Impossible: At least in the context of setting everything after the main game. A lot of the sidequests are tied to specific events in the game like Nilfgaard's invasion or specific character issues. All of these become nonsensical if played after the war is over. Likewise, you'd have to change all of the banners and troops and so on when wandering around the land.

Also, you'd need everyone to have different reactions based on everything which might or might not have happened. This would be a MAMMOTH overhaul and I don't think it'd have improved the game all that much to be honest. I'm content with no just having the characters not disappear personally.

2. Is this better than working on other projects: Like Expansions for the Game or possibly a spin-off?

3. Some problems are structural: You don't like the way certain characters went or stories or adventures? There's not much that can be done about that.

---------- Updated at 08:51 PM ----------



I'm glad you like my suggestions (presuming you're talking to me).

Firstofall: Yes, I was talking to you. Thanks again.

To your Post:

1. I wouldn't say impossible. That would count for a transition from W2 to W3, too. But they did it. (Even though they did it by ignoring or undermining almost all of our choices).
But at least in my head you could really pull it off by exchanging almost just Banners and troops. Post Game is a dead world anyway, so why not change the coating and leave it to mods to fill it with life? Would be interesting to see what mods would come up for different kind of Post Games. (And maybe also through somehting like playing another character - Let's say, you're not playing Geralt but Eskel for example - Although Geralt would be best).

2. I'd say yes, because it prolonges the life expectation of the game.

3. Well, they are facing wrath about almost every character decision right now too. Could it get that much worse?

 

[Songborn]

3. I think there are few characters where people would prefer an actualy retcon of their arc. In most cases it rather seems to be about adding MORE to their character. More explanations, more dialogue options to discuss matters. Some things could be fixed by just adding some more letters for Geralt to find, some will likely need new dialogue, which I suppose is the most expensive if it involves main characters. Maybe some stuff could be added to NPC chatter. You already have NPCs talkign about how Geralt killed the ice giant on Skellige, maybe some Novigradians could talk about how Radovid got offed?

 

[fishful]

Firstofall: 3. Well, they are facing wrath about almost every character decision right now too. Could it get that much worse?

That's going a bit too far isn't it?

I think most people will agree that the Witcher 3 is one of the best games delivered in a really long time. And definitely one of the best RPGs around.
They're not facing wrath about almost every character decision, people are picking up on smaller details that are actually quite meaningful to fans because of how important the game is to them.
The Witcher 3 just needs some polish (no pun intended), not a complete revamp.

 

[LiarOnElmstreet]

That's going a bit too far isn't it?

I think most people will agree that the Witcher 3 is one of the best games delivered in a really long time. And definitely one of the best RPGs around.
They're not facing wrath about almost every character decision, people are picking up on smaller details that are actually quite meaningful to fans because of how important the game is to them.
The Witcher 3 just needs some polish (no pun intended), not a complete revamp.

You misunderstood. What I meant was that some people will always be unhappy. Meaning, you're always facing a wrath by those who strongly disagree.

 

[swordsandroses]

I think the Witcher 3 is fine just the way it is.

I gave it a 10/10.

It is, graded on the curve, one of the best games I've ever played. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that it couldn't be improved and I was thinking of ways which might be the case to do so. One of the threads which talk about this sort of thing that I like is here: http://forums.cdprojektred.com/thre...Enhanced-edition-quot-aka-Legacy-for-the-ages

I, certainly, would be willing to pay more for a "Game of the Year: Enhanced Edition" which would contain more material for the Witcher: Wild Hunt. The thing is, I don't want to actually see the game built from the ground up like so many other posters have an idea of and was thinking about ways we could achieve a better version of the game without being ridiculous in our desires.

So, this is a thread for talking about reasonable suggestions to improve the game without attempting to overhaul it from the ground up. It's my thread so I'll try and go with what I think are the structural weaknesses of the game which would be improved. I would like to mention, though, that I think we can mostly agree the big thing about Wild Hunt is the majority of suggestions are story-related rather than technical.

We're invested in the work CDPR has created for us.

And they should be proud of that.

Thanks for the recognition, it's important to recognise the Enhanced edition thread in the suggestions subforum is focusing mainly on the WHY should and HOW would additional content be implemented.

I've only posted links to other popular threads that go in detail on WHAT can be worked on, not necessarily stipulated they all must be addressed.

I'm not sure I agree with quantity over quality though, which is what the original post suggests.
Having, say three major issues / requests sorted in a lenghty and meaningful manner would enhance Witcher 3 much better than adding a tiny line or tweak to all of them.

For example, it would be insulting to add Iorveth and Saskia in the same manner they did Letho and Sile, especially Sile, when we've gone in detail on why they deserve same amount of content like Roche and Ves, be it in vanilla or dlc.

There is a reason we have threads with hundreds of pages, where people analyse and go into great detail to process certain shortcomings and their possible solutions. I would not even think about diminishing all those great points made by reducing them to a one line of text.

It is our duty and obligation to present CDPR with the whole package (issue, possible solution and consequences) and they get to decide just how much and which ones are reasonable.

So, with everything above in mind, if CDPR told us they have enough time/funds/manpower to properly address three issues, I'd pick:

1. Tighten the Ciri story, her choice and consequence with Geralt and explore her endings.

2. Add Saskia and Iorveth, whether in main story or separate DLC

3. Add the final battle content, especially fight with Eredin

4. If there's room, add more side character content, like Dandilion, Zoltan and Sorceresses

I would not attempt to touch the White Frost, and would not try to add too much in terms of romance, as it is very susceptible to ruining everything that already exists.

 

[CTPhipps]

Glad you made an appearance!

For example, it would be insulting to add Iorveth and Saskia in the same manner they did Letho and Sile, especially Sile, when we've gone in detail on why they deserve same amount of content like Roche and Ves, be it in vanilla or dlc.

Roche appears in approximately three adventures versus Letho's one, which is not all that different from having a Iorveth single adventure.

Especially since the game is focused on Temeria.

Saskia is just about as much a character as Ves and we didn't get much of her at all.

I'm happy to get a 3 quest line adventure hook like Roche if they want to do that but I'll take what I can get.

1. Tighten the Ciri story, her choice and consequence with Geralt and explore her endings.

I'm not sure what you mean by tighten. I also wonder about "exploring" given I hope we get a later Ciri game.

You can't have her adventure if you explain how her reign went, for example.

3. Add the final battle content, especially fight with Eredin

I don't actually care all that much about Eredin versus the romance and war content but I recognize he's very much a generic villain. I'm not sure that adding more Wild Hunt content addresses nearly as much of what I perceive as the Witcher Wild Hunt's flaws.

4. If there's room, add more side character content, like Dandilion, Zoltan and Sorceresses

I think the characters are really the heart of the story to be honest and what people care about versus, say, the Wild Hunt.

I mean there's 900 pages complaining about Triss' content versus, I really think, a much smaller that Eredin is a yutz.

 

[Seboist]

Some suggestions off the top of my head:

- Implementation of cut content, such as Iorveth(for importers of his path from 2) as a possible alternative to Roche and Lambert possibly dying in Kaer Morhen depending on how many people you recruit for the battle.
- Add returning characters such as the Order of the flaming rose(whose absence is odd),Siegfried and Cynthia.
- Add references to outcomes of previous choices, such as Adda, Anais and Verden.
- I second the OP's suggestion with Ves.
- Add more quests relating to the war, where we can choose to side with either the North or Nilfgaard.
- More Romance/Sex options, popular and (personal) picks candidates being Cerys,Rosa var Attra and Tomira.

 

[Rivdoric]

Well, moving on:

Some problems I do see with an Enhanced Edition are as follows:

1. A Post-Game Mode Is Impossible: At least in the context of setting everything after the main game. A lot of the sidequests are tied to specific events in the game like Nilfgaard's invasion or specific character issues. All of these become nonsensical if played after the war is over. Likewise, you'd have to change all of the banners and troops and so on when wandering around the land.

Also, you'd need everyone to have different reactions based on everything which might or might not have happened. This would be a MAMMOTH overhaul and I don't think it'd have improved the game all that much to be honest. I'm content with no just having the characters not disappear personally.

2. Is this better than working on other projects: Like Expansions for the Game or possibly a spin-off?

3. Some problems are structural: You don't like the way certain characters went or stories or adventures? There's not much that can be done about that

+1, wanted to write the same thing but you just spared me some time, thank you :victory:

Following this, i think a good Enhanced Edition would be
- More Roleplay : being able to sit in Inns, being able to drink/eat with an ANIMATION not just like an mmo etc... etc...
- More Characters back to the game, which is by far the biggest problem as of yet, again, for more Roleplay (already wrote a mod-project for that here : forums.cdprojektred.com/threads/510...-back-to-Life-after-Ending-quot-Mod-Possible? )
- Some new Quests focusing on new monsters, some others focusing on a few characters from the previous games we didn't encounter in TW3
- Inventory overhaul like new tabs to separate books, eat/drink, potions etc...
- Trophies overhaul like it was in TW2

With the 2 Expansions and, I hope, the majority of bugs & issues corrected (they really should put an auto-sheathe on/off mode...) this would be enough, i guess