That was my point. They change things depending on their market objectives. And that's normal in the videogame industry. The problem is that, normally, these changes doesn't affects the key decisions of the game ir order to give consistency to the trilogy. And if one of those change affects it directly, normally, the developers tell to their clients. That's why I'm saying that I cannot "forgive" them, Anyway, totally agree with you
I was done with them when they said this game was Geralt's last but that's just awful that Iorverth and Saskia are done too, they had to be fan favorites as well, I certainly missed them in tw3, gone without so much as a word, not sure how you can do that as a company to character's that are fan favorites, it's just absurd.
Hehe, that would be so cool, but ain't probably happening though. Although I consider Roche path to be "canon" regarding world-state of W3 (for various reasons), I just love Iorveth path. Elves? Check. Dwarves? Check. Dragon? Check. Fight for freedom? Check. Iorveth? Check. Your run-of-the-mill High Fantasy? Nope. Iorveth spin-off (stand alone DLC?) that would bring some conclusion to Iorveth and Saskia story would be simply awesome.I'm not because you see the reason there won't be a third expansion is because they're secretly now working on The Witcher 4 which will involve Iorveth, Saskia et al!
Completely agree. Unfortunately, the game director for Witcher 3 has already said that Blood and Wine is the last content they deliver for The Witcher 3, which seems like a pretty clear indication of the Enhanced Edition or any extra content related to story elements from The Witcher 2 not happening.
Well, it's crystal clear that the studio has changed a lot since The Witcher 2 - I dare say they were in an ideal position back then, being a medium-sized team catering heavily to their fanbase, with the ability to deliver AAA products. Now they are too big to care. They still did a commendable job with The Witcher 3 and the DLCs. As Anderson says, they are great games - but that doesn't mean that The Wild Hunt is not a terrible sequel or a middling end to the trilogy.
Totally agree with you except for the job they've done with TW3. True is that they crafted a beatiful open world, with many details but the story was left in a second place and I wouldn't call it a commendable job. Not just as a sequel but as a standalone game: except for the first part, the story is really weak in my opinion.
That is a good point, but it does not amount to good storytelling. There is no reason why most of the characters and issues you dismissed could not be mentioned at least in passing or marginally present, for the sake of consistency and continuity with the universe that CDPR has been building. That does not mean that characters and plot lines from The Witcher 2 should have taken center stage at all. In many cases, it would have been enough to say as much as you did, e.g. mentioning that Annais became politically irrelevant, Saskia and Natalis probably died - except the jarring absence of Iorveth, a few dialogues with NPCs could have done a decent job of at least partially tying up loose ends from The Witcher 2. It would not have required more resources than a couple of the free DLC quests they released after launch. CDPR has taken the approach of barely even acknowledging their existence.
Yes, and yet the fact that these themes were originally planned (at least Iorveth and the Squirrels) to be a part of the game suggest that the developers did not want to discard the happenings of that utter masterpiece they delivered with The Assassins of Kings. We will have to agree to disagree on this one, but I can respect people enjoying and praising the game despite the absence of these elements. Cheers!
Hopefully you're wrong because it took them a year or two to update Witcher 1 and 2 to EE.
It does not look like Iorveth's planned quest line would have involved him siding with the Wild Hunt. He would have appeared in the Novigrad main quests first (Pyres of Novigrad, Get Junior, etc.), then at the Battle of Kaer Morhen as an ally, and in Final Preparations. This suggests a role somewhat similar to Roche's.
Actually, it took 11 months for the enhanced edition of both games to be released (see here). But if there is an EE in the plans, it may be announced at E3 in a few days. Although I have doubts, since in a recent interview it was said that no more new content is planned for The Witcher 3, and what is to be announced at E3 looks most likely to be an online Gwent game. Also, while it does not really prove anything, there does not seem to be unused new content in the 1.21 patch - previously, the new dialogues that have been added in version 1.10 and even some bits of Blood and Wine "leaked" in the files months before the release.
Well , i think it was related to expansions.
I am not saying there will not be an enhanced or GOTY edition of some sort, it just does not seem likely now that it would introduce noteworthy new content (quests, dialogues, cutscenes, etc.). Especially since in the above linked interview the director is asked if there will be any more game content released for The Witcher 3 at all, and he answers "no":
You insist always in the same argument rather than hear the opinions of others. Even in TW3 there are books which said that the Aen Elle and the Aen Seidhe took different paths and they weren't precisely friends. Iorveth could hate them just because the didn't help the elves when they need assistance. In any case, you are free to keep insisting in your own arguments
