The unfulfilled love between Yennefer and Ciri and an incomplete family

+
This thread is hilarious. Bitch on about Yen content all you want, apparently. I wonder how they'll police which content you can talk about in Cyberpunk? Should be interesting.
 
This thread is hilarious. Bitch on about Yen content all you want, apparently. I wonder how they'll police which content you can talk about in Cyberpunk? Should be interesting.

From what I know Cyberpunk is really mostly a setting.
So there will be a lot of (probably deserved) bitching but about different and overall simpler things.

I am more afraid at the low quality game design that is to follow, but apparently... I am the only one *sigh*.
 
Mhm, well, we mostly take action these days when a thread goes off-topic...
So yes, people can keep complaining if it's about the unfulfilled love between Yennefer and Ciri and an incomplete family
 
I don't want to simply go around in circles and rehash old points that people have made. The current state of affairs may very well be a design choice to reframe Ciri and Yennefer's relationship. If so however, it would be great if the relevant developers could affirm that this is indeed the case and explain their reasoning behind it.

They have no obligation to explain every choice in the writing that some of the fans do not like, and in fact no response to content related complaints has been more of the rule than the exception. Especially when it comes to controversial topics like relationships in the game - from the developers' point of view, the best course of action might be to say nothing and change nothing - making changes to the story or characters already established in the game just because fans demanded it can do more harm than good. The game is what it is, it may be better to eventually accept it and let go. Realistically, I expect that the main NPCs of the game said their last lines in patch 1.10, and nothing else will (or arguably even needs to) be added, except maybe a few lines only for Blood and Wine continuity.
 
Last edited:
The topic of relations between the characters in game is problematic, because we don't know what was planned, what was cut and what was deliberate. You couldn't possibly fit every relation and story elements between vast array of characters. The game would have to be a constant cutscene.

In the case of Yennefer and Ciri - I think that part of the script was scrapped (at least mostly), judging by some parts of the game, when Ciri actually talks to Yennefer. Which was a bad call, because it is one of the most important relations to show within the game - pair of protagonists and Yennefer, as the one of the most important person to both of them.

In my guts though, I feel it was trimmed, because it would clash with the perception of the choice between two love interests in the game. The game makes you care for Ciri, just like Geralt would do (duh), so Ciri being fond of and spending most of the time with Yennefer, would be viewed as unfair for Triss. To put it lightly. Hell, it was already viewed as unfair to some people. Which I don't agree at all. The game was unfair to many important characters and one of the reasons was making this stupid trio choice a big factor.
But whatever. Happened. Want this to be changed? Write a petition for Enhanced Edition or something along those lines.
 
The game makes you care for Ciri, just like Geralt would do (duh), so Ciri being fond of and spending most of the time with Yennefer, would be viewed as unfair for Triss.

It is true what you're saying but i consider this unfair from a witcher fan perspective. I don't care a thing about Geralt staying Triss. I don't care a thing about Geralt staying Yen.

I expected to see Ciri reunited with his mother, in a scene like the hut in the Isle of Mists. And no it isn't unfair for Triss, because the love which Ciri has for Yennefer is real and concrete as much as the love which Ciri has for Geralt. You just can't hide facts because the players would like Yen more than Triss, ffs this is not a competition.
 
Last edited:
They have no obligation to explain every choice in the writing that some of the fans do not like, and in fact no response to content related complaints has been more of the rule than the exception. Especially when it comes to controversial topics like relationships in the game - from the developers' point of view, the best course of action might be to say nothing and change nothing - making changes to the story or characters already established in the game just because fans demanded it can do more harm than good. The game is what it is, it may be better to eventually accept it and let go. Realistically, I expect that the main NPCs of the game said their last lines in patch 1.10, and nothing else will (or arguably even needs to) be added, except maybe a few lines only for Blood and Wine continuity.

I completely understand that the devs have no obligation to give us any answers. We paid for the game - not for them to respond to our questions and feedback, so to speak. I'm not making any demands, just a humble request :) On that note, I'd like to ask the people on this forum, in terms of content discussions - what content/character issues have the forums raised and the devs responded to? As someone who's new to the forums, I'd love a brief rundown of the precedents we have on this. thank you in advance! (if it happens)

With regard to changes in the story, I actually doubt I would have gone looking for this on the internet if the throwaway line by Ciri referring to Yennefer being manipulative wasn't included in the final game. I really didn't understand that line in the context of the game itself - why it was there, and what it was referring to. If there was a cost-efficient and story-efficient way of dealing with the valid concerns raised here (imo), it would simply be a matter of removing that one line. While it would be great for the whole family dynamic thing to be included, the Geralt centric nature of the story, as well as the constraints that a possible romance of Triss imposes, it is very understandable to have a lack of content on the family dynamic front, and I am much more accepting of that. So in terms of a pure suggestion which is rather unambitious, I would simply suggest removing that line. Even though I'd love more.
 
Last edited:

Guest 3847602

Guest
With regard to changes in the story, I actually doubt I would have gone looking for this on the internet if the throwaway line by Ciri referring to Yennefer being manipulative wasn't included in the final game. I really didn't understand that line in the context of the game itself - why it was there, and what it was referring to.

Ciri is simply yet another character who's giving hints to the player that Yennefer likes meddling with politics and is not honest to Geralt about her ambitions and plans:

[video]https://youtu.be/SZRpljZvY3I?t=1095[/video]
[video]https://youtu.be/Nc43O-ZFbj8?list=PLrYsj_Il7VSukkIC-U8S4luA04pWpBjpg&t=1170[/video]
[video]https://youtu.be/9UgC5HYoJ68?t=415[/video]
[video]https://youtu.be/2bq2Op4nCGQ?list=PLrYsj_Il7VSukkIC-U8S4luA04pWpBjpg&t=1046[/video]
[video]https://youtu.be/EuqysUQql_A?list=PLrYsj_Il7VSukkIC-U8S4luA04pWpBjpg&t=298[/video]

There is a deleted content about Yennefer making a deal with Emhyr and helping him capture the remaining Lodge members. Put this content back into the game and you'll see that everyone would be proven right about her. Fortunately, this ooc bullcrap was cut before the release, but everyone's opinion on Yennefer remained unchanged. It's just my guess, though, nobody from CDPR explained this decision ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I completely understand that the devs have no obligation to give us any answers. We paid for the game - not for them to respond to our questions and feedback, so to speak. I'm not making any demands, just a humble request :) On that note, I'd like to ask the people on this forum, in terms of content discussions - what content/character issues have the forums raised and the devs responded to? As someone who's new to the forums, I'd love a brief rundown of the precedents we have on this. thank you in advance! (if it happens)

They responded to criticism regarding the Wild Hunt and Eredin, as well as the political sub-plot in the game in interviews, and admitted that both could have been done better; in the expansions, they paid attention not to repeat the same mistakes, and made the antagonists much better. Also responded to this thread (acknowledged the problem, and made some minor dialogue tweaks a few months later), and this other one (admitted that there is an issue, but refused to change anything because it would have involved too much work to do properly). To summarize, when the developers responded to criticism, they generally admitted fault, even if they did not actually change much (if anything) in the game. When the only answer is silence - chances are they have no plans to make changes, or do not even consider it a problem.

Regarding the reasons why the relationship between Ciri and Yennefer is portrayed the way it is in the game, it is anyone's guess, and it may even be related to future plans with The Witcher 4. In any case, CDPR changing characters compared to the books or even their own previous games to make them better fit the story they want to tell is hardly unusual - just compare Radovid or Triss between TW1 and TW3, or Emhyr between the books, TW2, and TW3. So, I do not really see a problem. It may be frustrating to some of the book fans, but the game cannot please everyone - others are already complaining about the lack of continuity with the other games, and the excessive focus on Geralt's relationships with "new" characters.
 
Last edited:
In my guts though, I feel it was trimmed, because it would clash with the perception of the choice between two love interests in the game. The game makes you care for Ciri, just like Geralt would do (duh), so Ciri being fond of and spending most of the time with Yennefer, would be viewed as unfair for Triss. To put it lightly. Hell, it was already viewed as unfair to some people. Which I don't agree at all. The game was unfair to many important characters and one of the reasons was making this stupid trio choice a big factor.

REDs answer about such suggestions:

This is not the case and clearly evidenced by the fact that Ciri has little interaction with Triss as well. The reason the focus is on Geralt and Ciri is fairly simple. Ciri is a, if not THE focal point of the game, yet she is a character that newcomers do not know at all. Our narrative is thus focused on a character that many players had no emotional investment in prior to the game. Through the many interactions between Ciri and Geralt, we showed that Geralt cares deeply about Ciri which translates to the player understanding why Geralt is doing what he is doing and more easily relating to those feelings. The same, incidentally, goes for Yennefer. The reason she is present in Kaer Morhen in the dream sequence at the beginning, is primarily because we need to establish that she is important to Geralt and thus why the player should care about finding her. It is debatable if we managed it at all points throughout the game, but I did want to correct the presumption that we reduced Ciri-Yennefer interactions because of Triss or Triss fans. Cheers.
 
Glad you quoted that - I doubt I would have found it otherwise. If the devs want to focus purely on Geralt and Ciri's relationship rather than spend time on Ciri's relationship with other characters, that's a choice I might dislike, but have no problems with.

In any case, I would simply go back to that one throwaway line about including Yennefer in the group of people who wanted to take advantage of Ciri. It doesn't make sense in terms of the lore. As to evidence from how in-game Vesemir, Eskel and Lambert etc seem to portray Yennefer as a schemer and hence in-game Ciri taking that line also, it appears that this would be what is left of the original extremely OOC portrayal of Yennefer - which was thankfully cut.

I think it would be reasonable for Vesemir and gang to treat Yennefer with some distance and even suspicion. But not on the account of political scheming - which she has no track record of in the lore, even though she's accused of it a lot - instead on the account of her tumultuous relationship with Geralt. I kind of interpreted their attitude through the relationship lens, although now I'll probably pay closer attention on my second playthrough to see if this was indeed the case.
 

Guest 3842753

Guest
I completely understand that the devs have no obligation to give us any answers. We paid for the game - not for them to respond to our questions and feedback, so to speak. I'm not making any demands, just a humble request :) On that note, I'd like to ask the people on this forum, in terms of content discussions - what content/character issues have the forums raised and the devs responded to? As someone who's new to the forums, I'd love a brief rundown of the precedents we have on this. thank you in advance! (if it happens)

Lead writer on their goals for W3 regarding the family dynamic:

"The story's core was nailed early on, and had the goal of bringing Yennefer and Ciri in where they had been excluded before. And it was to be more personal and less political, the lead writer Marcin Blacha tells me. "We wanted to make a game about a disabled family," he says in his low, ponderous voice. "There is Geralt and Yennefer and Ciri, and they're not like usual people, but they love each other. It's difficult love, but they do. We wanted to make an epic story about a family."
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-08-17-inside-the-witcher-3-launch

BTW Blacha lurks here or used to, as theta77
 
REDs answer about such suggestions:

Yeah, I remember that response, but REDs say what they can say, or must say for the greater good. They would never admit publicly to doing something many people won't like, if it's not necessary to do so. I totally understand that by the way. It might be the way they decided to do it, it might have not been.

And I have never claimed that my theory must be true, that's just my opinion, based on specific ways the interactions were shown. I don't really want to discuss this in depth, but Triss's connection to Ciri was not the same thing as her connection to Yennefer. In the books it was still on the side and much less present than the mother and daughter relation (obviously).

The fact that both female sorceress have little to none interaction with Ciri is a disgrace, because it was an important story element. I just think lack of proper relation with Yennefer and Ciri is more of an issue. For story's sake of course.

To put it simply, game has a lot of issues story wise and lack of respect for certain characters. There is no need to discuss it really.
I hope CDPR learns from their mistakes and focus more on making the next games more refined on that matter - which they've proven with Hearts of Stone.
Keep it up.
 
And once again wow! Another great thread. I'm spending all of my time reading your threads these days xD I have to say, it's really nice to see that there are people out there that see Yennefer the way I do and love her character as much as I do.

By the way, remember when Yen was all "Let's kill all the dragons, dragons are bad, they are dangerous etc etc"? Wonder what changed her mind about that.... Oh wait I know : a baby dragon changed her mind. Yen was ALWAYS meant to be a mother figure and it started before Ciri was even in the picture. It's a such a big part of who she is.... It's something that defines her far more even than her relationship with Geralt, it has even defined part of their relationship actually.

Regarding her relationship with Ciri, well I've yet to read the whole thread but I believe all have been said already. They have something so special...

I've read a LOT of fantasy authors : Tolkien, Hobb, Cook, Rothfuss, McIntosh, Martin, Brooks, Eddings, Gemmell, McCaffrey, Williams.... And that's only a few of them. Among all of these, there is something that makes Sapkowski's books really special to me, that I have never found in any other book : the main protagonists, Geralt, Yennefer and Ciri, they don't care about saving the world, they don't care about the prophecies, they don't care about becoming the heroes of the story. All they care about is finding and protecting each other, and being together. That's Geralt giving up being a witcher to find Ciri and Yen. That's Yen enduring months of torture to protect Ciri. That's her paying for Geralt's contracts even when they are not together. That's Ciri risking everything to save Yennefer...

Well that's really too bad that apparently CDPR doesn't see all that the way I do... But I think all of that has been said countless times already as well so....
 
Last edited:
Well, I don't know what to say anymore, so much time went by and absolutely no reaction whatsoever. I hope I created this thread early enough (August 2015, even before HoS came out) to make a difference, to show this issue, the discrepancy from the books to the games in the characterization.

As I said once, if this didn't make any difference, nothing will, so I hope they can (or have already?) fix this one flaw, otherwise the last game will always have that bad aftertaste for me, because once you see the problem, it's hard to unsee it.


Edit: It looks like embedding gfycat links is a bit messed up, creating a lot of free space in my first post, hmm.
 
As I said once, if this didn't make any difference, nothing will, so I hope they can (or have already?) fix this one flaw, otherwise the last game will always have that bad aftertaste for me, because once you see the problem, it's hard to unsee it.

I know how you feel, but I think they won't do anything about it sadly. It is dearly missed in my opinion.

I recently made a tumblr post about their relationship aswel (just because I was in the mood for ranting and needed to express myself a bit). Thought I might share it here aswel: http://mistress-light.tumblr.com/post/143888432092/yennefer-and-ciris-relationship
 
As a general rule, i try not to think too much about the inconsistencies in the story, characterization etc because there are a lot and it would greatly mar my gaming experience if i pay too much attention to them. I like the witcher games nonetheless.

I agree with the majority of what was said about the Ciri-Yen bond. Yes, it would be really easy to convey that bond with a simple animation/facial expression or a small word "mother", "daughter" and yes i'm fully aware that the developers didn't adapt the books but, based on the witcher universe and characters, make their own stories. I got that a long time ago. I agree with someone who posted that the issue at hand stems from the love triangle/choose your love interest thing.Still, i think it's an issue worth raising and i find the omission of that bond borderline disrespectful to the lore. It rubs me the wrong way, and i would really like to brush it aside ( like i said at the beginning of my post ), but adding insult to the injury and, during the Kaer Morhen reunion, having Triss blurt out her cute moniker "little sis" to Ciri, which harkens back to their sisterly bond in the books, straight up pisses me off.

Anyway, very nice and thoughtful thread, keep it up.

p.s. First time i heard the name Blinky. I love it! :lol:
 
I agree with someone who posted that the issue at hand stems from the love triangle/choose your love interest thing.

That was clearly denied by developers, and this "issue" was also already brought to the attention of the story department and lead writer @theta77 (Marcin Blacha) long ago. Here is a list of links to responses from CDPR:
Post 1 (8th July)
Post 2
Post 3
Post 4
Post 5
Post 6
Post 7 (24th July)
If they intend to change anything, it should most likely be in patch 1.20 (to be released in a few days), since apparently there are no plans to release more Witcher 3 content after Blood and Wine. Thus, the "issue" has either already been worked on (possibly even as part of the new dialogues in patch 1.10), or it was rejected. In any case, it is not very respectful towards the developers to accuse them of things they have already denied, nor is there much point demanding changes when they have been refused or already made.
 
Top Bottom