The Stories Length and Content

[DleeofRivera]

The Stories Length and Content

I don't know about others but I actually feel the game was a tiny bit too short story wise, especially if it is Geralt's final chapter.

Act I had three parts to it and I really wish act two and three were the same. Most people probably know how prior to Witcher 1, Geralt joined the Red Riders in order to free Yennefer. Even though he got his memory back, he mentions to Avallac'h he has no idea what he did while with the Wild Hunt

Now when Avallac'h and Geralt went to meet Ge'els at Tir Na Lia, this seemed too brief to me. Wouldn't it be more realistic that while Geralt has one of the Wild Hunt in front of him as well as Corrine, he could find out what happened during his time with the hunt? Since its Geralt's final chapter, it would have been great to be able to explore that city in Tir Na Lia finding out exactly what happened to Geralt during his time with the hunt.

It would of also been great to get a better insight and more interactions with the Wild Hunt. We had very few interactions with them and didn't see their destructive nature as much as I would have liked. There are quite a few villages that are empty, if we trailed the Wild hunt to those villages and seen them burning (like in the trailers) would have really added to the immersion.

Eredin was Geralt's biggest fear and the final big boss of the trilogy so you would expect to see and learn more of him. Another thing is the White Frost, we have no idea what it was exactly even after finishing. One thing to think about is, The Wild Hunt was the main threat to Ciri and possibly the World they lived in so there should have been a greater focus on their backstories and motivations. I wouldn't completely write the game off just because of this. I just feel that for people who didn't read the books or play the first game, we're missing out on a really interesting story. When Geralt does Witcher contracts, he likes to know everything possible about what he's hunting yet we didn't really get to know Eredin inside and out.

I still find W3 to be one of the best games I've played in the past few years, it just didn't give me the closure I hoped for considering it's Geralt's final chapter.

Does anyone else feel like this? Should the Wild Hunt been giving a much deeper story before being killed off?

 

[devivre]

Actually for this game personally I don't need much more. Sure the White Hunt in TW3 seems a bit shallow as they speak too many one liners. But if you pay attention the game actually tells you a lot more about them than it seems at first. Plus it's not the first time they appear in a Witcher game. And it's not the first time the White Frost is talked about. But I guess after several years it's easy to forget that and CDPR could have made those explanations a bit more visual, I guess.

However I'd love to play a prequel with Ciri looking for Geralt and trying to save him . That would be a cool occasion to learn even more about the White Hunt and also visit elven cities . As for Tir Na Lia... I know what you mean but I can also understand why CDPR didn't go for that. Sure they could have for example let Geralt get captured and then escape... but other than that it wouldn't make sense to fill this place with quests at this point... so it would take an enormous amount of work (also since elven architecture is different than the rest in the game...) for only let's say an hour more gameplay. From this perspective I have to agree... not worth it. We had to wait long enough for this game already.

 

[Willowhugger]

Most long RPGs are 40 hours long.

Witcher is over a 100 hours long for most playthroughs.

I, honestly, think it should have been split into two games not longer.

Maybe make it a trilogy.

End Witcher 3 at Kaer Morhen.

 

[MisterKolega]

The length of the game is absolutely ok and there is no need for more than 70+ hours, if you do all contracts and side quests. What really irritates me is the fact that a good great percentage of the Witcher community feels that the ending was quite a bit rushed. Many major characters were not precisely explained (Avallach, Eredin, his generals and so on...). The Triss part was far too short for the end of the trilogy. Triss was badly managed in the game because we get to see her only really in the first part of the game, the second and third part of the story is COMPLETELY dedicated to Yennefer. Choosing Triss as you lover doesn't change the fact that you're gonna spend more time with Yennefer than with Triss afterwards.

But how is it even possible that so many player feel that even if they played the game for more than 70 hours, that they didnt really got satisfied by the epilogue of the game? There was no real catharsis in act 3 after Kaer Morhen. Act 3 begins with the battle of Kaer Morhen and after the battle the whole storytelling goes downslope until the final fight with the Wild Hunt.

 

[yagha]

I actually do feel that, for the conclusion of Geralt's story, the main quest (Not including most sidequests) was quite short.

Overall, I wish they hadn't gone with the 'open world' approach, but had stuck to TW2's more linear structure.

 

[frozenkex]

The length of the game is absolutely ok and there is no need for more than 70+ hours, if you do all contracts and side quests. What really irritates me is the fact that a good great percentage of the Witcher community feels that the ending was quite a bit rushed. Many major characters were not precisely explained (Avallach, Eredin, his generals and so on...). The Triss part was far too short for the end of the trilogy. Triss was badly managed in the game because we get to see her only really in the first part of the game, the second and third part of the story is COMPLETELY dedicated to Yennefer. Choosing Triss as you lover doesn't change the fact that you're gonna spend more time with Yennefer than with Triss afterwards.

But how is it even possible that so many player feel that even if they played the game for more than 70 hours, that they didnt really got satisfied by the epilogue of the game? There was no real catharsis in act 3 after Kaer Morhen. Act 3 begins with the battle of Kaer Morhen and after the battle the whole storytelling goes downslope until the final fight with the Wild Hunt.

Wait im not sure you are criticizing people or the game, because i agree on criticism about the game.

---------- Updated at 12:17 AM ----------

Most long RPGs are 40 hours long.

Witcher is over a 100 hours long for most playthroughs.

I, honestly, think it should have been split into two games not longer.

Maybe make it a trilogy.

End Witcher 3 at Kaer Morhen.

Umm... no?

 

[Willowhugger]

Umm... no?

I'd rather have a short polished game than a very-very long unpolished one.

 

[frozenkex]

I'd rather have a short polished game than a very-very long unpolished one.

its not that long if you dismiss all the "filler" content. Sure other games of such length have many flaws and some lack of polish but i wouldn't wish them at any point to be shorter. TES games, Bioware games come to mind.

Also being shorter wouldn't necessarily make it have better polish - it wouldn't affect things like mechanics and combat and other gameplay elements. And as for dialogue - you might think they will use remaining budget and make it better than it is now for instance, but in reality they would simply choose to have smaller budget. And if game ended at battle of kaer morhen that would be unacceptable to me. (and i'm sure for many others).