The Witcher 3 is GOTY, silencing all critics?

[Kallelinski]

The Witcher 3 is GOTY, silencing all critics?

So after The Witcher 3 won several awards in the Global Game Awards 2015, where everybody was allowed to vote,

• Game of the Year
• Best Developer (CD PROJEKT RED)
• Best Open World
• Best Story
• Best Audio

and second in

• Best RPG
• Best Visuals
• Best Innovators
• Best Expansion for Hearts of Stone

they also won awards at the The Game Awards 2015, which were giving by a jury

• Game of the Year
  
• Best RPG
• Developer of the Year

So, is it?

Because If I look around here, you could argue that the majority isn't really happy about the game with the Triss-issue been the pinnacle of it.

It took months after the release before the tone here in the forum was slightly less negative than it used to be to the point I didn't even wanted to look into new threads, because all they did was criticizing the game, which I liked so far, however this negativity was almost exclusively here and the comments under those news of Witcher 3 winning those awards just reinforce this impression to me.

Sure, a lot of people are also congratulating CDPR for this, but while those two threads will get maybe 10 pages over the time (right now they only have 4...), a thread criticizing the game gets easily 10 times more than this.

For instance the Triss-issue was never an issue in any pre/review I ever read, yet it was the most criticized aspect of the game here and the only one, which was covered by CDPR until now. Does this make the game now worse or are we just too nitpicky compared to others? Or even too much of a fanbody/girl?

For a direct comparison I actually really like what they did with Yennefer (and for the most part even Ciri..), yet I spent several hours to create this thread: The unfullfilled love between Yennefer and Ciri and an incomplete family
which could be easily interpretated into that I didn't like what they did with Yennefer/Ciri at all, but then I wouldn't have created this: Yennefer of Vengerberg or that thread: Explaining Yennefer's behaviour in the game to help people to understand her character and how good CDPR actually depcited it.

But aside from that there are also many other things people are criticizing, for instance the graphics. It was a huge issue for some that the graphics didn't look as good as presented in the trailers and they were right to criticize the game for it, yet it still got 2nd in Best Visuals. Why? Because it still looks great, but not as great as it was suppose to be.


W3 won the award for Best Open World and many would say that Witcher 3 is indeed the best open world game (ever?), but there are still things to criticize. For example that your choices have absolutely no effect on the world itself or how the world setting isn't changing through the game.

How does this even compare to your decision in W2, whether you go with Roche or Iorveth? The whole world/story changes depending on this decision. There isn't any decision of this kind in the game. Sure, you can decide who will be the King of Skellige, but how does that even affect the world and the story? Barely, if at all.


Coming to the maybe most conversed issue here (beside muh romance), the story. The heart of every serious RPG.

CDPR/W3 is being praised all over the globe for having such a great story, with such great characters and such a great world, yet if you ask people around here, they would say that it might be good, but not as good as we thought, in some points even worse than Witcher 2 or 1.

For some (and me) especially the last part of the game was a huge mess, because it didn't only deviated from their own strenghts but also from the books narrative. I don't want to repeat what already is writting there, but you probably get my point: While everybody is praising the story for being so great, a lot of hardcore fans have actually quite mixed feelings about it.

For me personal the personal story was the biggest topic of this game and I was rewarded with it for 90%, so something like the political aspect of the game was not as important for me as others this time, but I was still interested in it, yet I had to witness how they screwed it up. Threads like:
The Politics of the Witcher 3 or "What we liked, didn't like, and would have done differently?"
Politics in TW3
Emhyr - The Game Non-Character vs the Book.

were maybe not as huge as others, but that doesn't mean their weight/importance isn't even bigger than "Ciri didn't hug Yennefer often enough". I am just more emotional biased to the characters, so certain issues are more important for me than others.


There are a lot of other things like the endless refilling potions or that Geralt's skin is way too normal and should look a lot more pale, how they just removed characters from the whole game like Iorveth and Saskia, and and and...


But without listing now every single issue this forum ever brought up, my point is,

do we even have the right to criticize the game after all of those awards? Or should CDPR even consider our critic at all, if they get awarded like this?

Apparently CDPR did everything right from the start and their last game got the highest rating of all three (86-88-93 metacritic for PC), so they must have done something right, didn't they?

I would say yes and no.

The game gets praise for things, which were already done in Witcher 2 and even 1. The story and atmosphere of the game was always like this in this series, this isn't something Witcher 3 did first. I would even argue that the overall story was better in W2 and the atmosphere and feeling of the world was better in W1.

Even subtle things like "the NPCs are looking for cover, because it's raining.", yeah, they did that already in W2 and I think they even did that in W1, but I am not sure about that right now.

There are a lot of things Witcher 1 and 2 did already, but only Witcher 3 got the praise and now reward for that, why? Because I think a lot of people didn't even played them and are now astonished by Witcher 3, while some features are quite cold coffee for us veterans.

"So, are you saying the game is worse than people think and it shouldn't get the awards?" No!

I also think it is indeed the GOTY, easily, and maybe the best of the series, but only because of certain aspects of the game and because it covered those aspects for about 90%.

I was looking forward for a Geralt without amnesia and his reunion with Yennefer and Ciri after two long games without that, I was looking for his personal story and not so the overall story and I got what I wanted, more or less *cough*

and if people praise the game for that, the characters and their personal story, then they are right, it is indeed the best game, but overall? I would argue that they did good, but not as good as they could and the reason why I can say this, is because they did better in some aspects in their previous games and I think this is something that needs to be said and heard despite the awards.

Something like that the boss battles are rather easy and lame was already improved in the first expansion, so this critique was necessary and caused something, however what with the other aspects? In particular in story, world setting, choices and characters?

So far the only thing they tried to fix was the issue with the Triss-romance and depending on who you ask, it is either the best, the worst fix or they don't care at all, because the game was never about romance in the first place. So this famous fix doesn't even affect the story of Ciri, the background story of the world, the war, or the Wild Hunt, or or or

And as I said in the beginning this wasn't a concern in any review anyway, so that didn't even effect the overall rating of the game and with that the reason why it got those awards or not. At the same time Yennefer getting more hugs by Ciri won't change that either...



So here I am sitting, unsure whether I am suppose to be happy that the game/CDPR got the reward they deserved or concerned about it, because there are a lot of things they could have been done better, especially those things, they did better in the past.

How can it be GOTY, if some of their longest fans are disappointed? And quite often with right.


I know, there is a "general feedback thread", but I want to focus this dicussion on, whether CDPR should even consider "our opinion", if ours is mostly critical, while 95% of the rest says it is perfect the way it is.
Maybe this is even more suitable in the community-area, but since it is right now an actual hot topic about Witcher 3, I posted it here.

I think this is a serious topic, if the core fan community, which probably only makes up a single-digit percentage, has a different (and most likely a more profound) opinion than the huge mass of the gaming community. Before the release of Witcher 3 I'd have said that more than half of the people here on the board read the books, but since the release of Witcher 3 the amount of people, who only played Witcher 3 and with that only with the knowledge of that game pushed this ratio way down, making it sometimes even hard to discuss things, if there is such a huge difference in knowledge.

We have seen the incredible influx of new users after the release, the huge activity in the following weeks and now? I would argue that 90% of those new users are gone by now again, leaving us again with the core fan community plus some new people.

The amount of people, who have played all 3 games and read the books will increase again, because those, who only played and liked Witcher 3 will be gone after a while again, as they don't seem to be interested in the franchise/world after all. But those who love the characters, world and franchise will persists here, no matter with what they started at the beginning.

For instance I started with the Witcher 1 and 2 and read only then the books, then replayed the games, reread the books, replayed the games and so on...until Witcher 3 came and the cycle begun anew.


So is the opinion of the few, let's say "fan experts", more important or should be more considered by CDPR than a random comment on Youtube by someone, who maybe didn't even finished Witcher 3 yet?


I know, I know, I am stubborn, but since this is the only issue fixed by them...I am still disappointed that from ALL the things people mentioned in the last few months, the only thing they tried to fix was that about Triss and you can't deny that this was just simple because too many people asked for it/criticized it and I'd argue that more than half of those weren't even registered before Witcher 3 nor are still active here, yet this was the single issue they fixed.

Is that what we want? That the sheer number of votes is more important than a single opinion with a 30 pages essay?

Because then I fear that CDPR will rather satisfy the mass instead of its core fans, because as you can see the reward for that are awards and they will survive a slightly negative feedback on their forum in the long run.

 

[Phinnway]

Just because there are aspects of TW3 people don't like doesn't mean it's not GOTY. No game is perfect. And a game's biggest fans are also its biggest critics. Considering what else we got this year I think TW3 deserves it.

Bloodbourne - too niche for GOTY
Arkham Knight - predictable plot, annoying batmobile segments
Metal Gear Solid V - weak plot, empty open-world
Fallout 4 - bad graphics, horribly unpolished compared to the other contenders
The Witcher 3 - weak 3rd act.

All things considered, The Witcher 3 has less problems than the other contenders.

 

[PrincessCiri]

There are certainly parts of the Witcher 3 that I am not entirely happy with, but that doesn't mean that I don't think it deserved to win GOTY.

I tell anyone and everyone who will listen to me to buy and play the Witcher 3, because I think it's a great game. Does that mean it's above criticism? Of course not, but if I only played games that were perfect I wouldn't play anything.

 

[Garrison72]

They deserve it and the game deserves it. For all its faults, I recognize I came at the game with a boat load of expectations most critics and new fans to the series didn't have. It's also extremely ambitious with side content, quests and world/map design. They simply went above and beyond what most studios are willing to do, so no question it deserves it. But I'm frustrated that the stories in TW1 and TW2 were executed better and yet the critics and new fans don't seem to recognize where TW3 not only falls flat, but leaves behind a few key design elements that made the series unique. So in some ways, it is getting a free pass.

 

[guilherme22]

i think witcher 3 winning GOTY just makes conservatives fans of the series even more pissed about the major changes in the plot, plus overall.


i just finished playing the first two games and i agree many stuff where just left behind, but thats whats make witcher 3 so popular right now.


the developers wanted to get new fans into the witcher world and they succeed , the results are being displayed.


ps: i don't want any tw2 fanboy saying i'm a moron


xD

 

[dragonbird]

Of course they'll still listen, and they'll react the way they always do. If they agree that it "could be better", they'll change it, but everyone is just expressing opinions, and in the end the only opinion that has the power and right to change things is their own.

Which leads me to my main point. There are a lot of posts using some variant of "I have been a fan of the game since TW1 therefore my views are more important, and all other long-terms fans feel the same way". Well, there are also several million OTHER people who bought both TW1 and TW2 and HAVEN'T been posting criticisms in these forums ever since the game was launched. Some of those, of course, may have simply decided based on TW1 or TW2 that they're not interested in the series, some may have been so pissed off with TW3 that they just threw it away, but others will have stayed away simply because they're enjoying the game and didn't see any reason to come into these forums and demand it be changed.

So please avoid this artificial dichotomy into "Long term fans = dissatisfied, new fans = happy customers". Your sample size is too small to be meaningful.

And, as moderators, our reaction to any attempt to polarise these forums into new fans vs old fans will be exactly the same as our reaction to console or shipping wars. So put away those pitchforks.

ps: i don't want any tw2 fanboy saying i'm a moron


xD

And, while that may not have been the appropriate phrasing, neither do I. So anyone who DOES suggest this, regardless of how much it's coated in sugar, can expect appropriate responses.

 

[Brian6666]

In my opinion the game deserves all the praise it's getting, it is most certainly the best game I played this year and one of the best ever. When I was a kid, I dreamed of games like this existing one day. I am a sucker for story driven games and for me personally, TW3 has everything I want from a game, a story filled with rich characters I care about, an atmosphere that immerses me into the world, and solid gameplay to round that up. Even now, months after the game has been released and 3 playthroughs later, I still can't get the game out of my head, I still often play it, even if its just 10-15 minutes of walking around and soaking up the world. Like most of my favorite games, I will play it many more times in years to come.

I feel that gamers in general are an increasingly tough crowd to please with tendencies to nitpick even the smallest things, and exaggerate them to the point it ruins the experience for them. The game is not perfect, in fact no game is and I understand that different people have different preferences and complaints about certain aspects of the game, but for me the flaws pale in comparison when I look at the overall product and the love that went into its creation. I was among the people complaining about the lack of Triss content, but even if they refused to address that, I would still see the game as a masterpiece and it wouldn't affect my love for the game. There are other legitimate complains that people had expressed here on the forums, and while I agree with some and think they would make the game even better, TW3 remains a game that is IMO head and shoulders above its competition.

 

[guilherme22]

And, while that may not have been the appropriate phrasing, neither do I. So anyone who DOES suggest this, regardless of how much it's coated in sugar, can expect appropriate responses.

i'm just saying this because there was a user that said i didn't understood the witcher properly and the witcher 3 was a failure to appeal new fans and asked me to not respond to him again!

LOL.

Btw


I'm Not trying to polarize nothing since much of the critics witcher 3 is receiving is from old fans, or did i get it wrong some way?


My opinion remains witcher 3 had the best gameplay and the plot itself was enjoyable, i don't think anyone should be harassed for their opinions.

 

[dragonbird]

I'm Not trying to polarize nothing since much of the critics witcher 3 is receiving is from old fans, or did i get it wrong some way?

The bulk of my post wasn't targeted at you

 

[guilherme22]

The bulk of my post wasn't targeted at you

ok my mistake

 

[Triss.Hasengold]

• The Witcher 3 is GOTY, silencing all critics? <-------- No. Not before a potion drinking animation and meditation is added but otherwise perfect game.

In fact it`s the best game I`ve ever played. Most impressive work ever done with the best story ever.

 

[Holgaroni]

So is the opinion of the few, let's say "fan experts", more important or should be more considered by CDPR than a random comment on Youtube by someone, who maybe didn't even finished Witcher 3 yet?

That's something i'd really like to know, directly from CDPR. No PR things or vague words, straight talk.

Because i'm pretty sure that the majority of the people who were so desperate and voted polls on polls to bring more Triss content weren't familiar with the series at all. Why do i say that? Because an ordinary witcher fan would have raised a SHITSTORM about the treatment that Eredin and the TW2 choices got for example, and not some poor extra dialogues for you best WAIFU.


PS: Your posts are too damn long :lol:

 

[cyberpunkforever]

We are either too nitpicking neither too fanboy, I think, most of us here in the forum are here because we care, and we give feedback and suggestions to improve the game (if possible) for we have/had expectatios, most of the players who claim tw3 is perfect as it is haven't played tw1 and tw2, and I 'm convinced that tw3 is a great game, one of the greatest games and rpg ever, and certainly THE game of the year compared to the other games.

Those people saying tw3 is perfect as it is didn't have the expectations we had/have and played the game as any other game start-finished, ok good, that's it, not like us, putting so much attention and analyzing everything deeply, most of the people here in the forms have read the books, that allows them to be more specific when analyzing/criticizing.

I have the collector edition and preordered both expansions and I'm very happy with that, tw3 IS indeed the game of the year despite the critics, but, as we posted here it could be always better and we know that for cdpr can/could make it way better,

I expected to see Iorveth and Saskia, for they were two very important characters in the previous game and I had this expectation to load the save from tw2 and see the consequences but we won't see them ever again, I must accept that, despite that, tw3 is still a great game.

You should be happy, for the game/cdpr got the reward and still there are a few things that could have been better.

About graphics, yes there is a difference between some trailers and the game, for console parity or for whatever reason, but we can't do anything about it.
I don't know if the open world of tw3 is the best open world ever, but it's still a very good and beautiful one.

I'm not sure if "criticize" is the right word, but I think we can give some feedback and suggestions or even ask questions, for the members of this forum who enter and read almost every day are those who really care about the game(s) and the most supporting and loyal.

If our feedback and suggestions are more important than those from people who haven't played the first two games and played tw3 only once and because of the reason it was announced everywhere and played only to see what all the fuss is about, I don't know, But I do know that the devs read our feedack, and they apply it if they can/want, the first expansion is a 10/10 for 99% of the people here, that's because the dev's read our feedback.

Maybe they'll "fix" some other "issues" in the main game with next patches or the next expansion, we don't know that yet.

I still play tw3, I f*** love it, it has still flaws but it's the only witcher 3 we have.

As soon as I started tw1 in 2008 and saw the intro "his name was geralt of Rivia..." I was sure I wanted to see this adventure to it's very end, and now here I am, very happy to be part of this adventure "after all this years.."

 

[AlrightShadow]

• The Witcher 3 is GOTY, silencing all critics? <-------- No. Not before a potion drinking animation and meditation is added but otherwise perfect game.

In fact it`s the best game I`ve ever played. Most impressive work ever done with the best story ever.

Play a Dark Souls game and tell me you still want a potion drinking animation.

As for the topic at hand, I've voiced my complaints on here. Somewhat. Yet, I still thought that Witcher 3 deserved GOTY. It's not perfect, sure. Even CDPR realizes it. There's quite a few things that they wanted, but they simply had to axe. Did any of it effect the story? Who knows, probably. That doesn't mean that it didn't deserve GOTY.

Not only did they outdo the other nominations, they set a new bar for its genre. Bethesda is going to have a lot of work on their hands to top CDPR as far as the high fantasy RPG goes.

 

[Rawls]

So, is it?

As far as I'm concerned it deserves the awards. The game has weaknesses in my opinion (for me these include (1) post "Through Time and Space" narrative; (2) crafting/alchemy systems; (3) lack of certain characters (either depth wise or total absence); (4) post main narrative play is very lacking with the exception of HoS). However, for me the story is far superior to most video games I have played, the quest design is superb, the open world is engrossing, the characters and dialogue are well written, the combat is fun, the music is incredible, the graphics are the best I have played in this type of game. Those pluses are HUGE compared to the minuses.

So here I am sitting, unsure whether I am suppose to be happy that the game/CDPR got the reward they deserved or concerned about it, because there are a lot of things they could have been done better, especially those things, they did better in the past.

There are things that could have been done better, and that's good because it means there is room for improvement. A lot of this is subjective. I like TW3 more than either TW o TW2. But that's just me. There are parts of TW2 I like better, but by and large I enjoy TW3 more. I think expecting that every part of a sequel in a series be better than the earlier game is a bit unrealistic. TW2 was a freaking great game. One can't expect for TW3 to do everything better. If that is the expectation we have, we are destined to be disappointed.

For some (and me) especially the last part of the game was a huge mess, because it didn't only deviated from their own strenghts but also from the books narrative. I don't want to repeat what already is writting there, but you probably get my point: While everybody is praising the story for being so great, a lot of hardcore fans have actually quite mixed feelings about it.

The end of the game was a bit less than it could have been. However, I still felt good about the story when the credits rolled. I think the reason many outside of these forums are less critical of the story than what you see here is based solely on expectations. Most people haven't read the books or played TW. TW2 was well received, but not a huge release. So most people have only other video game stories to compare this game to. Compared to 95% of games, TW3 story is VERY strong. Compared to the books and other Witcher games, it's solid with definite issues. This forum consists of people who know a lot about the other games and about the books. We have higher expectations. That's fine. I think it's also why CDPR devs peruse these forums and look for feedback here.

So is the opinion of the few, let's say "fan experts", more important or should be more considered by CDPR than a random comment on Youtube by someone, who maybe didn't even finished Witcher 3 yet?

do we even have the right to criticize the game after all of those awards? Or should CDPR even consider our critic at all, if they get awarded like this?

The lawyer in me cringes when people start talking about rights. We have the "right" to our opinion and speech in most countries. But in the context of this forum it's not about "rights." CDPR has provided us with with the opportunity to comment for a reason, namely to provide a location where they fans can discuss the games, drum up interest for the games, and provide feedback. I would expect that they appreciate constructive feedback regardless of its positivity or negativity. That's how they learn about issues, and can improve upon either current or future games. They should consider feedback, regardless of awards. You can always make something better.

.I am still disappointed that from ALL the things people mentioned in the last few months, the only thing they tried to fix was that about Triss and you can't deny that this was just simple because too many people asked for it/criticized it and I'd argue that more than half of those weren't even registered before Witcher 3 nor are still active here, yet this was the single issue they fixed.

I would actually deny "that this was just simple because too many people ... criticized it." They explicitly said they changed it because they read the criticism, looked at the game, and decided that it truly was a major issue for the balance of the story to them. Devs changed it because devs realized THEY did not like their product as it was. That's what they said and I take them at their word. Ginger Effect explained it pretty well:

Here is the thing. The major thing. I know it's gonna be a shock to some but...we are not perfect. (LEGASP!!!!!)

The biggest issue that we as a team identified with the Triss situation is that the current implementation does not really represent the very core design philosophy we hold dear. Namely, that your choices carry consequences and those consequences WILL present themselves to you.

As it has been stated in the opening thread, the consequences of choosing Triss are not adequately represented. This was something that was brought to our attention by this thread. We went back and looked at it again and realized that yes, this is indeed an inconsistency and one that deserves our attention. So we sat down, took our notes from your suggestions and checked what is viable to do. The result of that is what you will eventually see.

To the people who are somehow annoyed that we will correct the inconsistent consequences that are currently present in the Triss romance I say this: Please understand that this is not a case of us changing something simply because fans want it. This is because fans alerted us to something which we, internally, discussed (hence the long silence in between replies) and eventually agreed that it did not fit our core philosophy of including consequences to the choices the player can make.

In any case, I hope this clears things up a bit and puts a rest to the infighting about which issue deserves what kind of attention.

Not everybody agrees with that decision, but I can respect that they didn't like what they had put out and changed it as best they could. If they are satisfied with the other main complaints, or don't have the time to change the other issues (changing act 3, the crafting system, or adding in entirely missing characters is much more work than adding a few lines of dialogue).

Because then I fear that CDPR will rather satisfy the mass instead of its core fans, because as you can see the reward for that are awards and they will survive a slightly negative feedback on their forum in the long run.

I don't think it should primarily be to satisfy either group at the end of the day. Their goal should be to make a great game. A game they would want to play. They should look at all feedback. I would guess they value more informed opinions more because those opinions are based on more information, but they shouldn't aim to satisfy anyone but themselves. They are very good game developers. If they satisfy themselves with their product, I'm pretty sure we consumers will be satisfied as well.

 

[Holgaroni]

I would actually deny "that this was just simple because too many people ... criticized it." They explicitly said they changed it because they read the criticism, looked at the game, and decided that it truly was a major issue for the balance of the story to them. Devs changed it because devs realized THEY did not like their product as it was. That's what they said and I take them at their word. Ginger Effect explained it pretty well:

Of all things they realised only the lack of Triss hugs? M. Tomaszkiewicz himself in a conference explicitly said, regarding a question, that his most regret of the production of TW3 was the Wild Hunt (not triss content), he again explicitly said they realised too late in the procress that there were not enough screentime for them. This is even more clear if you played HoS, and see how the main villain is treated.

So. They already knew of the Main Villains big problems, they saw the topics and the disappointment but they instead decided to partially "fix" a romance? WHY.

kay:

Spoiler

And yes, it's still my personal GOTY of all time regardless

 

[Rawls]

Oh I think they know it's a huge problem. But fixing it is WAY harder than fixing the Triss thing. You would have to add entire sections to the game. I'm not sure they want to take resources away from Cyberpunk to do that at this point. I agree that it's a bigger issue, but the opportunity cost of fixing the Triss thing was small. The opportunity cost of fixing the main narrative is much larger. Also, just to clarify, went with Yennefer in my "canon" playthough and prefer that option ... just pointing out why they would change that, but not some of the other things.

The big things left (to me) are
(1) Main narrative 3rd Act/Wild Hunt - would have to create multiple quests and probably new areas to properly portray the wild hunt.
(2) Crafting/alchemy - whole system would have to be re-balanced and organized.
(3) Lack of characters - adding in old characters (i.e Saskia and Iorveth) would require making multiple quests to make it more than cameo appearances (which would be unsatisfying anyways).
(4) Post ending play - many lines of dialogue, change npcs in multiple areas depending on game choices (i.e. changing soldiers in certain areas).

Those issues take a lot of time and resources. Adding a few lines of dialogue to show the consequence of picking Triss is comparatively easy. Just my opinion.

 

[Holgaroni]

Those issues take a lot of time and resources. Adding a few lines of dialogue to show the consequence of picking Triss is comparatively easy. Just my opinion.

What i have in mind regarding the Wild Hunt fix it's pretty similar to that!

- In the first frozen village where you go to find the Nilfgaardian Spy it is showed a cutscene where the Wild Hunt enters the village but it is cut when Eredin comes off his horse. It would cost that much to show Imlerith,Caranthir and Eredin torturing that spy and talking to each other?

-In the cave you enter with Keira, same thing. Why Nithral just says stupid things (die humans, argh, you're though etc...) *minifacepalm*
Add some cutscenes where those big bad elves are trying to enter Avallac'h labs!

- Let us see Ciri and Avallac'h surronded by the Wild Hunt on Skellige, Avallac'h explosion and Eredin cursing him!

- The Battle of Kaer Morhen? Before Ciri drops her sword and surrender let her TALK with Eredin! Let him say something which has some sense, please!

- At the sabbath agaisnt Imlerith? Again, let him say something more just like you can talk with Letho in TW2 at the end before fighting him!

- The final battle? Let us say some lines of dialogues with a timer at Eredin!

It is all already there in the GAME, they just have to fill it with more dialogues.

 

[Garrison72]

Of all things they realised only the lack of Triss hugs? M. Tomaszkiewicz himself in a conference explicitly said, regarding a question, that his most regret of the production of TW3 was the Wild Hunt (not triss content), he again explicitly said they realised too late in the procress that there were not enough screentime for them. This is even more clear if you played HoS, and see how the main villain is treated.

So. They already knew of the Main Villains big problems, they saw the topics and the disappointment but they instead decided to partially "fix" a romance? WHY.

kay:

Spoiler

And yes, it's still my personal GOTY of all time regardless

Because fixing the Wild Hunt and Eredin and Radovid and all the politics is far harder than adding some banter with Triss. Impossible without a massive overhaul of cut scenes, story, gameplay etc. But this thing with Triss. There were other topics that could have enhanced her character arc - the plotting of the lodge, her role in TW2, her indecisiveness in TW1...and they went with romance banter.

:sadtriss:

Ok, I'll stop.

 

[dragonbird]

The moderator bit: To follow-up from my previous post, there are existing threads where people have been discussing their lists of what they would like to see changed. Please don't feel the need to repeat those suggestions here.

The non-moderator bit:

Those people saying tw3 is perfect as it is didn't have the expectations we had/have and played the game as any other game start-finished, ok good, that's it, not like us, putting so much attention and analyzing everything deeply, most of the people here in the forms have read the books, that allows them to be more specific when analyzing/criticizing.

I doubt if there are that many people who think it's perfect, it's just that a lot of people don't necessarily expect a developer to change a completed game just because some fans ask for changes, any more than they expect a book or a movie to be changed. The fact that CDPR *have* made changes, and may make more, is a credit to them, but personally, I find it sad when it's presented as an expectation, or something to which fans have a right to demand.

Criticising the game is one thing, but criticising CDPR for not changing it because of demands by a group of fans? That's not the relationship I have, or expect to have, with the creator of something I have chosen to purchase. I didn't commission this, I bought what they had created.