I'm hoping for a well delivered love continuance/divergence paths. Choice is paramount in romance just as it is in in quests imo, anything but the horribleness of a single forced romance.KnightofPhoenix said:
with Yen ? no they will found together again and again that is there faithSirnaq said:
Yes, I completely agree.BORCH3DOHLEN said:
Maybe the false Ciri will die at the end of TW3 and everyone will declare Ciri for dead,
ending the hunt after her and allowing her to move on.
Imagine a new Witcher trilogy, a new Witcher school where our protagonist trains
and one stormy night a hooded figure stands in the door, revealing herself to be Ciri.
The Witchers know she is supposed to be dead and have a heated discussion about granting
her refuge in that school and the dangers of it.
Of course this is all wishful thinking.
I just want to be able to fight alongside mature Ciri ! Waaaaaaah ! :'(
Cause my little heart will be crushed if I'm railroaded to Yen.gregski said:
Seriously though, I sense you're holding back an argument. If you think CDPR should indeed choose for us, I'd like to hear your reasoning on how they might go about that.
edit-if that came off as snarky it wasn't my intention.
Seems to me that the thing that fundamentally separates RPG's is the interactive nature of making choices along the way, whether that's to pursue a romance or how to complete a quest etc. I don't support changing that in the final installment.gregski said:
I kind of agree with you.slimgrin said:Cause my little heart will be crushed if I'm railroaded to Yen.
Seriously though, I sense you're holding back an argument. If you think CDPR should indeed choose for us, I'd like to hear your reasoning on how they might go about that.
edit-if that came off as snarky it wasn't my intention.
In a game with an emphasis on an open world driven by choice and consequence,
we should at least have an alternative to a romance with Yen.
I'm not that worried about romance options in TW3 though,
because I'm more hyped about seeing Ciri and Yen make an appearance.
If there are any romances in the game, that's just the cherry on top of the cake.
Because the only true love is the one freely given, and not pre-determined by fate, or something else beyond our control. It is what philosophers believe free will involves - that there are alternatives a person can choose from, and which alternative a person chooses comes from him, and not something external to him, such as fate or pre-destination.gregski said:
I suspect what Gregski might be skeptical of is giving the player choice just or the sake of it, a la Bioware. If so, then I heartily agree and I'm willing to lose some freedom of choice if it makes the narrative stronger. The Witcher isn't a exercise in wish fulfillment, sometimes the plot beats you down, deprives your Geralt of exactly what you'd want because of how you chose. If I made a choice in TW2, or at some point in TW3 that deprives me of the chance to settle down with Triss, I can live that. That seems like a CDPR approach to C&C. It shouldn't be like 'okay, game's about to end, here's your selection: Triss, Yen, Ves. Now choose.'emperorzorn said:I kind of agree with you.
In a game with an emphasis on an open world driven by choice and consequence,
we should at least have an alternative to a romance with Yen.
I'm not that worried about romance options in TW3 though,
because I'm more hyped about seeing Ciri and Yen make an appearance.
If there are any romances in the game, that's just the cherry on top of the cake.
That's definitely one of the things I meant. First, it would just be bad storytelling - and I value that higher than pure ability to "choose". I write "choose" because it's not like you have real choice in games - you can rather pick from a few alternatives. My Geralt cannot romance with anyone else than the developers let me.slimgrin said:
And I agree - making it a simple Bioware-dialogue-wheel-type selection would just kill it for me and make it just another "hey, it's just a game" moment.
I am no philosophy graduate so I guess I cannot go deep into theory of good will or love, especially the true one. However, I don't think there's one definition of love that is the right one. Or that the game should in any way implement such definition.slimgrin said:
What I mean is buried in following question - do you ever really choose who you love? I am not talking about fate or pre-destination. But my life experience taught me that things in relationships are far more complicated than "should I go for Yen or Triss" or "I share these experiences with Girl 1 an these experiences with Girl 2, so I'll go with number 2" etc etc (I know, it's simple, but it's also very simplified in games).
Sometimes we end up loving people we don't have many obvious reasons to love - hell, sometimes people shake their heads and ask "What does she see in him!?". Sometimes we stay indifferent to people that would be the ultimate logical CHOICE to fall in love with. Sometimes our loved one ask us "Why do you love me?" and the first answer that comes to our minds is "I...I don't know...I just do".
I don't want to go in circles, so I'll just make my point - loving someone consciously and logically is sometimes hard. Loving 2 people at the same time is even harder. Having to choose one love over another is one of the most heartbraking, soul crushing experiences that exist. Re-creating it in a videogame is no small challenge - especially if we're talking about some mature treatment, not Bioware's "choose your own (sexual) adventure" type of thing. So either the developers reach some sort of mastery in evoking emotions and attachment to characters(including one character gamers have never actively engaged with in any type of relatioship) to make me feel torn and heartbroken when the choice appears or I don't care for it. And if I don't care for it - there's no point, really.
"But RPG=choice!" cliche just doesn't cut it for me, at least not this time and not with this type of choice.
I agree it is hard, but if CDPR can do it, it is better to have a choice than not to have it. I have this big problem with TW saga (well, in a good way, so it is not really a problem but something important to think about) and it is a treatment of fate and destiny. Geralt and Yen are connected by the last wish. I really do not want it to be something Yen would never choose on her own, and I want her feelings for Geralt be not just a consequence of the spell. Otherwise it would be like in Saskia's case - under Philippa's spell she felt being madly in love, but when spell was broken she felt taken advantage of, and wanted to break Philippa's neck. Yen being his only choice in TW3, with her full cooperation, would be more of an indication that destiny is her chain, and she is simply dragged by it after Geralt. Giving them a choice (who knows may be it is her who does not want him in her life anymore) will be more rewarding, and would show that they managed to transcend destiny. In case they end up together anyway it would show that it is Yen who choose him, and presence or absence of the last wish was irrelevant.
Yes, in RL we are not completely free to choose what people we love, and our options are limited by our upbringing and environment. But even a limited choice is way better than no choice at all. Would you be OK with marrying a woman who you agree to marry only because of hypnotic suggestion, and later, when it was lifted, realize that you would never have chosen her on your own? I know I wouldn't.
Yes, in RL we are not completely free to choose what people we love, and our options are limited by our upbringing and environment. But even a limited choice is way better than no choice at all. Would you be OK with marrying a woman who you agree to marry only because of hypnotic suggestion, and later, when it was lifted, realize that you would never have chosen her on your own? I know I wouldn't.
You have to look at it this way:
The Witcher books are a set story strictly defined by the writer.
The Witcher games are a set story defined by the players actions.
And that is exactly the beauty of it.
In games we get to take part in the narration by taking the role of the protagonist.
Now, the Witcher lore is only a stage for the Witcher games to take part on.
That being said having the choice ALSO means you can narrate TW3 in a way which perfectly matches the books and fulfills your wish of lore accuracy.
But you can also stray from the conventional, set paths and explore a "what if" scenario.
I see choice as an advantage, really.
The Witcher books are a set story strictly defined by the writer.
The Witcher games are a set story defined by the players actions.
And that is exactly the beauty of it.
In games we get to take part in the narration by taking the role of the protagonist.
Now, the Witcher lore is only a stage for the Witcher games to take part on.
That being said having the choice ALSO means you can narrate TW3 in a way which perfectly matches the books and fulfills your wish of lore accuracy.
But you can also stray from the conventional, set paths and explore a "what if" scenario.
I see choice as an advantage, really.
I'm all for choice, but meanigful. It has to be treated carefully by the writers especially in the emotional department and for me a forced choice because RPG is as bad as a forced lack of choice.vivaxardas said:
I was talking specifically about meaning of choice when it comes to relationships in the game, and for me an emotional investment doesn't really mean exploring different "what if" scenarios in the first place. Your remark sounds rather general and as such I can agree with it.vivaxardas said: