SPOILERS - Very Disappointed

[dmcaldw]

There are two important hints just before you go to get Ciri . Each one sets you up for the actions you should take .




Hint 1 :

Spoiler

Hint 2 :

Spoiler

Choose the ice skating dialogue while with Yen while she is attending to Uma . This basically tells you to stay away from options that are overbearing .

 

[sv3672]

Sadly, nobody of CDPR has responded in any way to the critique about the narrative in the last third of the game yet, no matter if it's about the general narrative, about choices or about character writing (with the one exception of the relationship between Geralt and Triss).

To be honest, if those leaked dialogues are really all the changes that are going to be made, then even that may be more for PR than to really fix problems in the game (which would take more effort). And larger flaws in the story and characters cannot be fixed with some kind of "Eredin now says 15 sentences instead of 12" type of patch. I also wonder if it is reasonable to make major changes to the story, characters, or endings of the game after it is released, or if the modifications should be limited to filling "holes" without contradicting existing content. If an enhanced edition of the game is going to be made (not confirmed yet), then the developers will have a look at everything they know was left unfinished or rushed, but that would only happen after the two expansions are released.

 

[Pug.]

To be honest, if those leaked dialogues are really all the changes that are going to be made, then even that may be more for PR than to really fix problems in the game (which would take more effort). And larger flaws in the story and characters cannot be fixed with some kind of "Eredin now says 15 sentences instead of 12" type of patch. I also wonder if it is reasonable to make major changes to the story, characters, or endings of the game after it is released, or if the modifications should be limited to filling "holes" without contradicting existing content. If an enhanced edition of the game is going to be made (not confirmed yet), then the developers will have a look at everything they know was left unfinished or rushed, but that would only happen after the two expansions are released.

I think making "major changes to the story, characters, and endings of the game after it is released" in response to fan feedback is precarious at best. If CDPR decides that they want to release an Enhanced version, that would be great, but I don't want to play Witcher 3 Wild Hunt: The Scholdarr.452 Edition, or the Sevean edition, for that matter.

Fundamentally rewriting the entire last third of the game would also be cost prohibitive, and would probably take away resources from other ventures, e.g. possibly creating a third expansion, making sure that Hearts of Stone and Blood and Wine are the best that they can be, etc.

---------- Updated at 07:10 PM ----------

Nilfgaardian conquest of the North is no better than Radovid's rule... Radovid ensures the freedom of the Northern people while Nilfgaard's Empire would assimilate and kick the Northern peoples of their lands for Nilfgaardians to take up and then put the peasantry to work in mines and manufactories under even worse than serfdom..

How did you arrive at that conclusion? It seems to me that Nilfgaard grants conquered territories a good degree of autonomy. Places like Toussaint come to mind.

Radovid was pretty unhinged at the end of Wild Hunt. I'm not sure that I'd like to leave him in charge of Novigrad, burning heretics, witches, dwarves, and pretty much anyone that doesn't meet with his approval.

 

[Guest 3847602]

Fundamentally rewriting the entire last third of the game would also be cost prohibitive, and would probably take away resources from other ventures, e.g. possibly creating a third expansion, making sure that Hearts of Stone and Blood and Wine are the best that they can be, etc.

Hypothetical rework of 3rd act is a bit more important than hypothetical 3rd expansion if you ask me

 

[saladin1701]

I'm the same, mate. I got the Ciri death the first time around because the way the snowball fight dialogue is presented it looks like a rhetorical question so I picked the other one and never had the fight. How in the world having a snowball fight builds character I'll never know. Relieves stress? Yes. Cheers someone up by having fun? Yes. But character building? Really? Same with trashing a lab. That's going to look real good when social services come knocking.

 

[TootyNooty]

How did you arrive at that conclusion? It seems to me that Nilfgaard grants conquered territories a good degree of autonomy. Places like Toussaint come to mind.

Radovid was pretty unhinged at the end of Wild Hunt. I'm not sure that I'd like to leave him in charge of Novigrad, burning heretics, witches, dwarves, and pretty much anyone that doesn't meet with his approval.

Autonomy? You mean control under a Nilfgaardian governing body, where Nilfgaardians get good treatment and everyone else is subjugated or killed, places like occupied Cintra and Aedirn come to mind, where innocent people were hunted down, butchered and taken as slaves.

Nilfgaard works very similarly to the Roman empire; it's great to live under... if you're Roman Nilfgaardian or rich - But for the rest it's a resource-leeching, slave driving and cruel Empire which uses the masses of Northern bodies to install fear among the few that will remain if Nilfgaard were to win - It'd be easy to control the North if all the fighting men were dead and the survivors were put to work in mines...

I say Viva La libertà!

Also non-human hate is a thing which is widespread across the North.. It will only get more intense when the non-humans are blamed for the loss of the war and underground hate groups arise to seek revenge.

Mages plotted against the Kings, against one another and against the North.. Those involved in the plots are secretive and so a cleansing of a corrupt, plotting creed isn't uncalled for - But most of the mages would easily be able to get to Kovir, through magic or through evacuation.

The Witch Hunts last 4 years, 1272-1276.. 4 years of Hunts - An eternity in servitude to the Empire that will suck the North dry of it's identity and resources - No thank you.

 

[dmcaldw]

I'm the same, mate. I got the Ciri death the first time around because the way the snowball fight dialogue is presented it looks like a rhetorical question so I picked the other one and never had the fight. How in the world having a snowball fight builds character I'll never know. Relieves stress? Yes. Cheers someone up by having fun? Yes. But character building? Really? Same with trashing a lab. That's going to look real good when social services come knocking.

The snowball fight was important in the fact that Ciri made the decision herself to get cracking at learning the magic after the fight . The other part of trashing the lab wasn't the turning point it was the conversation after talking to Avallh'c's girl . There are other conversation point like after stealing the horses that are important there is more than one point of " bad choices" through out your discussions with Ciri which leads up to the ending .

 

[Pug.]

Nilfgaard works very similarly to the Roman empire; it's great to live under... if you're Roman Nilfgaardian or rich - But for the rest it's a resource-leeching, slave driving and cruel Empire which uses the masses of Northern bodies to install fear among the few that will remain if Nilfgaard were to win - It'd be easy to control the North if all the fighting men were dead and the survivors were put to work in mines...

I'll just comment on this once, since I don't want to take this thread off-topic or involve the mods, but I did want to make a few brief observations.

Spoiler

1. Drawing parallels between Nilfgaard and the Roman Empire isn't entirely accurate. First of all, the Roman Empire - depending on whether you subscribe to the traditional end date of 476 CE or allow for the Eastern Roman Empire as a legitimate successor - spanned roughly 503 years to 1480 years, and that's not including the 726 or so years of the Roman Republic. The government, citizenship rights, personal liberties, religious values, and social mores changed a lot during that time, and to characterize their empire as a monolithic organization bent on exploiting the masses is, in my opinion, a distortion of the historical record.

2. With the passage of the Edict of Caracalla in 212 CE, every person living within the territory of the Roman Empire, regardless of class, origin, or race was classified as a full Roman citizen with all the rights and obligations that entailed.

3. While slavery did exist within the Roman Empire, there was actually a great degree of social mobility. The sons of freedmen, for instance, could run for political office. Many of those working within the imperial administration were slaves and they often earned a great deal more than your average free-born Roman citizen. Also, slavery was not for life. Manumission was common, slaves could earn a savings or peculium with which to purchase their freedom, and slavery was not predicated on race and prejudice like here in the Americas. I am not excusing it, simply saying that slavery has existed in almost every western nation until recently, and that in many ways slavery in the Greco-Roman world was less harsh than its modern American and European counterparts.

4. The Romans brought trade, infrastructure, a common tongue and order to an otherwise chaotic Mediterranean. One need only look at structures like the Pont du Gard in France or the city of Leptis Magna in modern day Libya to get an idea of their engineering prowess and the benefits that Roman rule brought to assimilated provinces.

Honestly, your post calls to mind the Hollywood caricatures of Greeks and Romans that you encounter in 1950's films like Ben Hur and Spartacus. History is not as black and white as you are making it out to be, and modern western nations have committed just as many transgressions - perhaps even more - than their ancient predecessors.

 

[Mebrilia]

Problem is in the witcher 2 you had only to care for geralt... Geralt was the center of evrything.. in W3 you are not dealing only with geralt but also with Ciri that have a total different personality from geralt... Choices can happens in both ways...Maybe someone will act as you expected.. Maybe someone will act as you unexpected.. Life is like that... And w3 have a really nice story...

I know the game is huge and takes a lot of time but i suggest you something...

Take your time.. a week maybe or two... Then after return to play... It will be better considering also that the patch and the upcoming expansion will give you other interesting thing to discover..

About ciri reacting as schizophrenic well... She was chased all the time... Finally she reach kaer morhen and find the people that for her are like a family only to get attacked after by the wild hunt that littarlly smash uncle Vesemir neck on front on her eyes..... After all of this you expect a person to behave in logic manner?

 

[Charcharo]

The launch trailer was called "Go your way" for a reason
It already told me... what was expected of me...

 

[Scholdarr.452]

Problem is in the witcher 2 you had only to care for geralt... Geralt was the center of evrything.. in W3 you are not dealing only with geralt but also with Ciri that have a total different personality from geralt...

Which personality? I'm still looking for one...

---------- Updated at 06:40 PM ----------

About ciri reacting as schizophrenic well... She was chased all the time... Finally she reach kaer morhen and find the people that for her are like a family only to get attacked after by the wild hunt that littarlly smash uncle Vesemir neck on front on her eyes..... After all of this you expect a person to behave in logic manner?

That's a nice excuse for pretty much every logical plot hole - but also a very cheap one.

Something like that would work well in a book or movie with a predefined storyline. But in a video game that is told to be heavily grounded in C&C it's the most stupid setting one could think of. If there is no causality at all to be weighted or expected all decisions and choices become completely arbitrary and therefore lose all their power for branching storytelling. I guess the main writers of TW3 simply forgot that they still made a video game and not a book or movie and that player psychology and game design works differently than what people expect from linear storytelling and from making narratives for movies or books...

 

[RC-07]

You thought being serious and going the adult/mature way was a good decision. Well, not all people like it that way. Deal with it.

P.S. acting "mature" or "immature" isn't right or wrong, good or bad. It's just different, each great in their own way.

 

[Mebrilia]

Which personality? I'm still looking for one...

---------- Updated at 06:40 PM ----------


That's a nice excuse for pretty much every logical plot hole - but also a very cheap one.

Something like that would work well in a book or movie with a predefined storyline. But in a video game that is told to be heavily grounded in C&C it's the most stupid setting one could think of. If there is no causality at all to be weighted or expected all decisions and choices become completely arbitrary and therefore lose all their power for branching storytelling. I guess the main writers of TW3 simply forgot that they still made a video game and not a book or movie and that player psychology and game design works differently than what people expect from linear storytelling and from making narratives for movies or books...

And thanks to that really!... I am sick of golden candy ending games used to hold your hand and existent to the only destiny to serve the player "winning at any cost at the end" i love to read... and i read a lot.. That's the main reason that despite all his flaw i love witcher 3 the storyline is handled like a book it dosn't feel plastic like a videogame...

I always loved RPG problem is the new Rpg are usually gathered at people that dislike rpgs.. people that find read a good book utterly boring.. People that prefear a story is revolved around them and the world, the setting, even the narrative revolve around them... I am sick of this kind of rpgs... I am glad cd projekt handled this game storytelling like a book...

I had not problem to all to understand Ciri motivations... She felt guilty to bring death to Vesemir.. She wanted all to end at any cost for protect people she love... Geralt can be overly protective in this manner ciri will lack in the end the strenght to face the white cold... Or he can encourage her understanding her reasons making Ciri gain will and strenght for the huge task she have to accomplish... Sounds pretty logical to me... If you keep a person always in a jar of glass this person will be never prepeared for the risk in life... Ciri motivation histeria or stubborned may be not logic for you... But is really logic in fact...All she want is protect people she love.