The Yennefer/Triss choice in TW3

[Garrison72]

"Geralt finding his true love, Yeneffer.."

I'm not all that comfortable with this statement by CDPR. On the face of it, it seems like a hero rescuing the swooning maiden in the tower scenario, although I know CDPR is better than that. The problem is players are barely introduced to Yenn. If we rescue her at the beginning of the game, it's anticlimactic. If we rescue her at the end, it's saving a character we're supposed to care about...that we ( the gamers) have never met.

 

[username_2093396]

On the face of it, it seems like a hero rescuing the swooning maiden in the tower scenario, although I know CDPR is better than that.

If she's anything like in the books, she will definitely not be a swooning maiden I think we will need to find her and help her restore her memories, but I don't think it will be a "damsel in distress" type of story.

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

By that point in the game, Alvin isn't really a threat to anyone else.

Errrr, him being dangerous is the whole plot of the game.

And I don't mind the option of being single. But I'd rather they focus their efforts on triss and Yennefer only, rather than introduce other characters who did not have the same build up as the former two.

 

[Mihura]

Wow people need to chill, I think everyone has the right to have an opinion even if that opinion is about taking away your choices, it is ok if you only want Yen as romance because people that have the books believe that is away more realistic for a character like Geralt and it is ok for people to disagree with it. I do not think caling people names is the way to go, even if their opinions sucks to you.

Bottom line Geralt is a define character and whatever people like it or not, there are a lot of limitation that come with it. I for one after reading the books belive that what CDPR is doing actually makes sense. If you want to blame someone blame them, there are the ones who believe that Geralt personal story should be about finding his great lost love after having all his memories, Is it fair to other people romances? no but after the Shani exclusion it is easy to see it coming. In my opinion putting Yen on the second game would had avoid a lot of this rage about romance but you have to understand that Geralt is not a character that any of us created, this is not Skyrim or Dragon Age. I bet that Ves will have even lesser part to play on the next game.

 

[username_2093396]

Errrr, him being dangerous is the whole plot of the game.

He had prophetic powers which could be dangerous if the wrong people used him to see the future, and I thought Triss and her mirror buddy were the wrong people However I don't remember Alvin having any offensive magic abilities which could hurt people around him. He was ultimately dangerous because the visions drove him mad, not because of having magical abilities that would be directly harmful to other people. I think if he had stayed with Shani instead of teleporting away, she could have helped him deal with his visions in a better way instead of going insane.

And maybe Triss could have too, for that matter, but I don't think Triss is inherently a better choice. She's more powerful than Shani, but I question her motives. Can you imagine what damage Philippa would do if she had access to a source? (That last part is in retrospect after I played TW2)

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Shani wouldn't have the faintest idea on how to deal with these visions that are completely magical in nature. Alvin needed to control them and Triss was the only one who could do it. That, and Alvin is a ticking time bomb, he doesn't need to know any offensive magic. What if someone pissed him off and he went crazy? What if he accidentally blew up an entire quarter of the city. With magic, especially a source, Alvin literally becomes a wild card. Not to mention time travel, which ends up making him dangerous. Shani doesn't have a clue how time travel works and how Alvin can control it. Only someone like Triss would be able to handle it. Not to mention that Salamandra is after him and Shani couldn't protect herself from candle lights.

So whatever motives Triss may have, you are still ignoring the one person who CAN do something about him, by going to the other person who simple CAN'T. And if you were so worried about Triss' motives, then she could have just taken Alvin from Shani with ease if she wanted to. So however one puts it, it's just illogical.

The entire situation is extremely poor. It makes Shani and Triss sound like childish idiots. And it makes Geralt look like an imbecile for playing along instead of setting them straight.

 

[cmdr_silverbolt]

...but you have to understand that Geralt is not a character that any of us created...

This is a poor excuse for the omission of the Yen or Triss choice. The whole point of these games has been to experience alternative versions of narrative based on player decisions. I still don't see how the Triss over Yen decision is so unique that it should be excluded from the game.

Like I asked before, is Geralt so shallow that he can't possibly begin to think differently than he did in the past?

Enforcing the idea that Geralt will only want to be with a "one true love" is a very unrealistic and hokey character development choice- it seems like the player is being forced into the Yen only scenario solely because "it happened in the books".

But if I wanted just to experience the story, and have no control over how it progresses, then I would read the book, not play a choice/consequence game.

Also, the Yen only scenario negates everything the player may have done in the previous games- how is the player expected to maintain the same level of role-play interest when the game callously decides to ignore player directed character development.

I also don't like people insisting others to "calm down". It's only natural for the player to voice their concern if the game seems to be losing its original way of being, which allowed players a choice in the important events in the story.

 

[username_2093396]

Shani wouldn't have the faintest idea on how to deal with these visions that are completely magical in nature.

But she's a doctor and might know how to deal with hallucinations and insanity in general regardless of the cause.

And as for most of the dangers that Alvin potentially posed, I hadn't read the books the first time I played the game so I only had Triss' word for it that Alvin was dangerous. Considering she had an interest in convincing me to leave him with her, I didn't think he was as dangerous as she was claiming.

The entire situation is extremely poor. It makes Shani and Triss sound like childish idiots. And it makes Geralt look like an imbecile for playing along instead of setting them straight.

That's true. The choice of what to do with Alvin could have been handled much better, especially since it ends up not mattering at all who he goes with because neither of them can prevent him from teleporting away. Even though that's kind of meta-knowledge learned from multiple play-through's, it's probably also a part of why I don't think it's illogical to choose Shani: my suspicions of Triss are neither confirmed nor denied so far which means I still believe my initial assumptions, and Shani didn't do anything wrong because Triss isn't capable of protecting Alvin either, so I don't feel guilty for making a bad choice because they're both bad choices so it didn't matter anyway.

In my opinion it would have made the most sense to leave Alvin with Shani but to have Triss visit and give him magic lessons on a regular basis. That would have been best for Alvin, and would have made the most sense based purely on what I knew up to that point in the game, but unfortunately the romance was tied up with the Alvin choice and both women take it personally instead of agreeing to work together for Alvin's benefit.

Anyhow, I had a point with this Even if a player chooses to leave Alvin with Triss, it's still possible for the player to not consider Geralt in a relationship with Triss, and the relationship in TW2 was kind of forced without giving the player a choice aside from saying it doesn't mean anything. This is why some players don't see it as Geralt being in a relationship with Triss for two games, and why I hold more value in the short flings with Shani and Ves compared to Triss.

I don't think it's fair to completely dismiss other characters just because waking up in bed with Triss is a mandatory part of TW2 without any choice given. The Triss relationship only means anything if the player wants it to, and some players find other characters a lot more interesting than Triss.

That's why I'm hoping Shani and Ves will appear in TW3 to provide some closure, even if they end up not being romance choices. Although if either of them actually does turn out to be a romance option then I think Yen has some serious competition in my game

So in summation, I think the romance part is probably a really small percentage of the game overall so it won't bother me too much if Yen ends up being the only choice as long as they actually do a good job presenting her and making it seem like a good idea. However, if there is choice involved, then my Geralt might not want to be with either of them, especially if a nicer person is an option.

 

[cmdr_silverbolt]

That's why I'm hoping Shani and Ves will appear in TW3 to provide some closure, even if they end up not being romance choices. Although if either of them actually does turn out to be a romance option then I think Yen has some serious competition in my game />/>/>/>/>/>

I don't think it's appropriate to consider the Geralt-Triss relationship on the same level as his relationship with other women in the game. It's more reasonable to see a Geralt/Triss or Geralt/Shani scenario than a Geralt/Ves one.

It's not reasonable to expect the same level of interest from Geralt for a one time fling and years long relationship.

I think it's like this with regard to how likely it is for Geralt to be with one of the women (who are not Yen) from the game: Triss > Shani > Ves

If a choice exists, it should exist between the most likely candidates, namely Triss and Yen. And I think it would be stupid to bring back Shani all of a sudden when she was not in the most recent game.

 

[Mihura]

This is a poor excuse for the omission of the Yen or Triss choice. The whole point of these games has been to experience alternative versions of narrative based on player decisions. I still don't see how the Triss over Yen decision is so unique that it should be excluded from the game.

Like I asked before, is Geralt so shallow that he can't possibly begin to think differently than he did in the past?

Enforcing the idea that Geralt will only want to be with a "one true love" is a very unrealistic and hokey character development choice- it seems like the player is being forced into the Yen only scenario solely because "it happened in the books".

But if I wanted just to experience the story, and have no control over how it progresses, then I would read the book, not play a choice/consequence game.

Also, the Yen only scenario negates everything the player may have done in the previous games- how is the player expected to maintain the same level of role-play interest when the game callously decides to ignore player directed character development.

I also don't like people insisting others to "calm down". It's only natural for the player to voice their concern if the game seems to be losing its original way of being, which allowed players a choice in the important events in the story.

I think when you go on a personal level like calling people selfish for having opinions is a little aggressive and I doubt you can have a discussion like that, so yes I think people need to calm down.( I am not referring to you but to the way the topic is going)

That is why having a define character in a RPG from a book can cause a lot of problems, especially one with a personalty. Why do you think they gave amnesia to him to being with? If Geralt really has all his memories it is impossible for him to just ignore Yen and be with Triss that would be out of character. The problem here is that he is indeed the book Geralt now, that is a problem that CDPR created by give him all the memories.

I agree with you that this takes way choices from the player but I always got the impression that on the romance front Geralt had always his own individual preferences like awaking up with Triss on TW 2 without the player input, there are little things that you detect or at lest I did. And do not get me wrong I would love to create my own witcher and have a lot of romance options but this game is not like that.

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

The Triss relationship only means anything if the player wants it to, and some players find other characters a lot more interesting than Triss.

Them being considered more interesting or not is irrelevent.

Geralt CAN profess his love for Triss and express his desire to spend his life with her. Geralt CAN'T do the same with either Ves or Shani. Ergo, Geralt as is in the game never considered what he did with either as something more meaningful than flings, while that is not necessarily the case for Triss.

So excluding the players who did pick those options with Triss is not the same as not bringing back explicitly short flings that were clearly short flings.

 

[vivaxardas2015]

Well, Yen was not in any game, and I doubt that the majority of the gamers ever read even a single book. Honestly, without reading the books I would have no idea what this fuss is all about. Yen, Yen, Yen - who a hell is she, apart some cartoonist character from cut-scenes? The most important part now is how all these possible women will be presented in TW3. Otherwise a lot of people who play would have no idea why in a game series prized for its choices, some babe is shoved down their throats as some eternal love.

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Yen, Yen, Yen - who a hell is she, apart some cartoonist character from cut-scenes?

Not to mention Letho didn't approve of her...

Screw Dandelion and Zoltan, I want to drink vodka with Letho and talk about life.

 

[cmdr_silverbolt]

The problem here is that he is indeed the book Geralt now, that is a problem that CDPR created by give him all the memories.

The memory return is not what is making game Geralt into book Geralt. The insistence on making Geralt single-minded is purely a CDPR decision, and it makes no sense in the scope of the game.

It's reasonable to expect character development from previous games to remain in effect.

CDPR has written meaningful scenarios in the previous games, and they hold just as much stock as any book scenario.

Why is it okay to give the player a choice on either helping Ciri or not, but then to take away the choice to be with Triss. Why is the Triss choice more out of character.

I get that everyone wants to be CDPR's knight in shining armor, but it's reasonable to question a story decision when it doesn't make sense in the scope of the game.

It's true that Geralt chose Triss over Shani without player input. What I don't appreciate is how we are expected to forget that that happened.

Again: If I wanted just to experience the story, and have no control over how it progresses, then I would read the book, not play a choice/consequence game.

 

[Garrison72]

Well, Yen was not in any game, and I doubt that the majority of the gamers ever read even a single book. Honestly, without reading the books I would have no idea what this fuss is all about. Yen, Yen, Yen - who a hell is she, apart some cartoonist character from cut-scenes? The most important part now is how all these possible women will be presented in TW3. Otherwise a lot of people who play would have no idea why in a game series prized for its choices, some babe is shoved down their throats as some eternal love.

That's the issue. We are only told she's important to Geralt in TW2, not shown. Why would players be interested in rescuing a stranger? Even using flashbacks to fill in the gaps would be insufficient, unless they want to turn half the game into a movie about Geralt and Yen.

 

[vongraudenz]

Questions. What if when we finally find Yennifer she still suffers from amnesia and has no idea who Geralt is, will we force Geralt on her? What if we as a player just don't like Yennifer as she is written, like some of us who have read the books. Would our Geralt still choose her? Finally, what if she has found somebody else? All of these are possibilities.

 

[cmdr_silverbolt]

It doesn't matter who or what Yen is like now, what matters is that Geralt should have a choice in being with her or not. It seems artificial that the player will be allowed to make some important choices, but not all.

The problem is that these games are based on a book, and everything that a player wants may not be in the confines of book "canon".

But taking away player autonomy from one of the most important decisions in the game story (Triss or Yen), is an immature way to deal with the problem.

The choice for CDPR is this: to tell a story, or to make a true choice/consequence game.

If we want a true choice/consequence, then we will just have to make peace with the fact that everything the players do with Geralt is not going to follow book canon.

It's not true that we play the witcher games solely for the story.

Okay, I just thought of something and I feel ridiculous: we are assuming that CDPR has already made their mind to exclude the Triss or Yen decision based on the translation of info from a biased source (sorry, Kallelinski).

Regardless, everything I've said holds in the case that we are really not given a choice in Geralt's character development.

RPGs can be used for storytelling, but the role-playing is the relatively more important aspect. Role-playing in the previous witcher games included giving players a choice in all important story decisions.

 

[Oloroar]

cmdr_flashheart, I just want to hug you!

 

[username_2093396]

Them being considered more interesting or not is irrelevent.

Geralt CAN profess his love for Triss and express his desire to spend his life with her. Geralt CAN'T do the same with either Ves or Shani. Ergo, Geralt as is in the game never considered what he did with either as something more meaningful than flings, while that is not necessarily the case for Triss.

So excluding the players who did pick those options with Triss is not the same as not bringing back explicitly short flings that were clearly short flings.

I didn't say the Triss choice should be excluded (I could personally accept there not being a choice about Yen *if* the story is done well enough, but I would prefer for there to be a choice). I was mainly just saying that from my point of view, the flings with Ves and Shani meant a lot more than anything to do with Triss which is why I want to see those characters again, even if it's just in the capacity of catching up with a friend.

I'm not dismissing Triss' importance for players who like her, and I don't like to see other people dismiss the importance of Ves or Shani for players like me. My Geralt actually considered settling down with Shani before she dumped him in between games, and he really respected Ves as an equal and a kindred soul of sorts. Depending on how someone plays the game and which choices are made, any of the characters could be more important to the player

Not to mention Letho didn't approve of her...

Screw Dandelion and Zoltan, I want to drink vodka with Letho and talk about life.

Hee hee, yeah Everything Letho said is pretty much what I thought of Yennefer in the books, at least towards the beginning. She becomes a bit nicer once she takes on the role of Ciri's mother, but considering that she has amnesia now she seems to have reset to how she was at the beginning of the books.

Why is it okay to give the player a choice on either helping Ciri or not, but then to take away the choice to be with Triss. Why is the Triss choice more out of character.

Wait, what? Geralt has a choice to help Ciri or not? If anything, that seems horribly out of character. In the books Geralt always put Ciri first and would help her before worrying about romance issues. I think that would be almost like giving the player a choice whether or not to let Dandelion and Zoltan hang in TW2. It just doesn't fit how he treats the people he cares about

It doesn't matter who or what Yen is like now, what matters is that Geralt should have a choice in being with her or not. It seems artificial that the player will be allowed to make some important choices, but not all.

As I alluded to earlier, the player doesn't get a choice in terms of how Geralt feels about Dandelion and Zoltan either. His feelings towards recurring characters from the books are mainly based on how he acted in the books (aside from Triss in which he seems to have mistaken her for Yen in TW1 but started to realize his mistake in TW2).

On the other hand for brand new characters (like Roche, Saskia, etc.) or characters who Geralt never really interacted with in the books (like Henselt, Dethmold, etc.) we get to decide how Geralt feels about them.

 

[cmdr_silverbolt]

In the same vein as Iorveth, I don't have any illusions about the importance of these threads on the forum. But we try, right? We hope that what we are talking about will be taken into consideration by someone in the position to make a difference in the game. While my words might have been straight forward, I hope they did not seem rude.

It is CDPR's prerogative to make the game however they like, and as players all we can do is voice our opinions, or not play the game if we feel like it has completely failed our expectations.

Wait, what? Geralt has a choice to help Ciri or not?

There is no chapter format, so the player is free to decide the quests that will be completed. One of the plot lines is helping Ciri, so when we put two and two together we see that the player is free to ignore helping Ciri. Please correct me if I am wrong.

It does not make sense to be allowed to have freedom over what Geralt does with regards to Ciri, but not with what he does with Yen.

His feelings towards recurring characters from the books are mainly based on how he acted in the books (aside from Triss in which he seems to have mistaken her for Yen in TW1 but started to realize his mistake in TW2).

You're right- Triss tells him about his relationship with Yen and Ciri on the boat ride to Flotsam. But the player was still given the choice to follow up on a relationship with Triss after Geralt realizes his "mistake".

It shouldn't be out of the question to follow the same protocol as the previous game.