Triss vs Yennefer [NOW WITH SPOILERS. Oh, well.]

+

Triss vs Yennefer [NOW WITH SPOILERS. Oh, well.]

  • I like triss better

    Votes: 269 49.5%
  • i like yen better

    Votes: 200 36.8%
  • I like tris better, and from a RP point, I would have to go for yen

    Votes: 49 9.0%
  • from a RP point, I'd go with triss aswell.

    Votes: 25 4.6%

  • Total voters
    543
Status
Not open for further replies.
@Zyvik I guess you're right lol. Three beers and a bottle of wine plus writing on a small tablet... Oh god I hope I won't hate myself when I read my post in the morning. Off to bed.

---------- Post merged on 19-07-2015 at 05:00 AM ----------

Oh god what have I done...

 
Reminder - commenting on your like/dislike for fictional characters is perfectly OK. Negative comments about human beings is not.

A few posts were deleted. From now on, expect a slightly more forceful response, which typically means ponies and bright, sparkly banhammers.
 
Reminder - commenting on your like/dislike for fictional characters is perfectly OK. Negative comments about human beings is not.

A few posts were deleted. From now on, expect a slightly more forceful response, which typically means ponies and bright, sparkly banhammers.

So basically you mean, saying "X character is an asshole" is ok.

Saying "People who like X character are assholes" is not.

Right?
 
So basically you mean, saying "X character is an asshole" is ok.

Saying "People who like X character are assholes" is not.

Right?

Well, saying "X character is an asshole" could be seen as trolling in certain contexts, but otherwise yes.
Try for "I think X character is an asshole because...." instead. ;)

(And that doesn't work for people, of course. "I think people who like X are assholes because..." will still attract ponies and banhammers)

I think that's covered all the variations...?
 
Well, saying "X character is an asshole" could be seen as trolling in certain contexts, but otherwise yes.
Try for "I think X character is an asshole because...." instead. ;)

(And that doesn't work for people, of course. "I think people who like X are assholes because..." will still attract ponies and banhammers)

I think that's covered all the variations...?

Yup.

Post something negative about a character (if you have an argument to base it upon).

Don't post something negative about people who like said character (even if in your mind you believe you have a reason for it)
 
Triss is perfection in my eyes, and I understand the need for comparisons. I think CDPR intended to give players the choice to choose between them. It's not like the book which is more linear. The beauty in this game lies in the fact that you have choices. Your decisions not only have short-term consequences but also long-term ramifications. In my first (and only) playthrough, I romanced both, and got what I probably deserved. I didn't want to break up with Yennefer. I couldn't. It just felt wrong.

Good discussion though.
 
There's not rel freedom of choice at all. A real choice in a mature game of a grey world might do the main character have sreious doubt about what he really feel inside. The way how CDPR has manged the "romances" is far away of being hard and complex for those who only play the games and those who have read the books. Making such openworld-RPG has been a poisoned challenge for CDPR wiriters in order to concilate both options and make Geralt's decision be as harder as his life is.
Summon of Geralt's feelings in TW1 with no previous book read or aknowlodge of Sapkowski's Stories.

A man wakes up, his memories have disappeared, but not his feelings. He knows who deeply loves a sorceress, and when you open your eyes a beautiful redhead sorceress cared for him, she says know him very well, and she demonstrates him a clear appreciation. 2 + 2 = 4
Any character (from the worst enemy to the best friend) contradicts this view of man. He trust the redhair girl, she must be the sorceress who his feelings remember, so he give those old love feelings to her with any hesitation. Some flashes appears in his mind about a raven black woman... another sorceress. No feeling reactions, No dubts. No quetions. He goes on with the redhair as his true love he knows he has loved before losing his memories....

Summon of Geralt's feelings in TW2 with no previous book read or aknowlodge of Sapkowski's Stories.

He lays with the redhair for a months. Despite the flashes recovering his memories about the black raven hair woman, no doubts araise in his heart about his feelings and the woman whom he gave after awake in Kaer Morhen, despite memories start to tell him that those old feelings wer for another sorceress, not for the redhair. No confusions show. No inner debat, no avy conversation with redhair about what's happening (a unknown conversation take place in a boat, but player is nor informed about the real content, a content given by the same woman who has no objection to supersede the old sorceress in the man feelings).

Summon of Geralt's feelings in TW3 with no previous book read or aknowlodge of Sapkowski's Stories.

The man who lose his memories but nor his feelings recovers the first one. More than 20 years of memories suddenly fill his minds and, supposselly, links correctly with the feelings. In normal circunstance, the image of the old sorceress regaining her place in his memories and the shoc of be aware that the redhair woman was a mistake is missed, ignored. The fact that he must being admiting he maybe feels something strong for the redhair despite her lies is ignored. How is he reacts? Can any man live such situation a remains convinced about his true feeling without a doubts? No. But nothing of taht is showed. No a hint, a word.

Instead of that, we only know that he takes his horse and decide searching the old sorceress who was the original owner of the old feelings. She appears as a cold and distant manipulative woman (?) He finds her. No reactions. No conflicts. Then he meet the redhair once more. A kiss/no kiss in a party and the one who has doubts is she. He, after all was happent the las 7-8 months doesn't show any conflict. And she is so sweet and charming that nothing what happent in previous games has importance at all.

The man who lose his memories, but not his feelings doesn't give a hint to the player how he feels, you play Geralt, you must know what he feels. If not, don't add shallow romance opitons in his story like a A or B choice lacking all this info about his memories. Or simpliest. Don't make Geralt recovers his memories, the same memories he had in seven books. I cannot see the sense in the actual TW3 Geralt's emotional path if in the games Geralt ought to be a deepth grey character.

My IMO. There's no anti-Triss or anti-Yen. There's a lack of thorough explanation of Geralt's emotional situation from CDPR.
 
[...]
My IMO. There's no anti-Triss or anti-Yen. There's a lack of thorough explanation of Geralt's emotional situation from CDPR.

I agree, you're right, but...yeah, now here comes the BUT :
I don't see the necessity to explain Geralts feelings in detail. This is an RPG. And you, the player is up to choose about Geralt's feelings. That's what a RPG is about imho.
CDPR gave you basics about the character and left all other things up to you. That's fine for me. I woudn't want it any other way (don't get me wrong, I speak for myself only).
My game, my Geralt.

And I agree that you have too little information if you wish to play lorewise.
 
Last edited:
This is an RPG. And you, the player is up to choose about Geralt's feelings. That's what a RPG is about imho.

YEah, but the matters is that TW3 is suppossed to be "another RPG" but a new concept of RPG and deep-mature storyline. In an open world. great game. I'v enjoyed the 3 time I've played it. But as the high bar was given but CDPR expectation, allow me expose what I notice as a weakness in the result.

Of course, if TW3 is suppossed to be like another RGP, then my thoughts have nothing to do with :)
 
I agree, you're right, but...yeah, now here comes the BUT :
I don't see the necessity to explain Geralts feelings in detail. This is an RPG. And you, the player is up to choose about Geralt's feelings. That's what a RPG is about imho.
CDPR gave you basics about the character and left all other things up to you. That's fine for me. I woudn't want it any other way (don't get me wrong, I speak for myself only).

My game, my Geralt.

And I agree that you have too little information if you wish to play lorewise.

Agree 100%. Emotional detail in an RPG needs to rest with the player.
 
Agree 100%. Emotional detail in an RPG needs to rest with the player.

Yes, emotion maybe is the wrong term in English, sorry. I'll try to learn more for to do it better next time. So, anyway, if emotionals details in an RPG needs to rest with the player, Why some players feel compelled to create a list of changes related on scenes romances if not actually affect at all the end of the story?
 
Yes, emotion maybe is the wrong term in English, sorry. I'll try to learn more for to do it better next time. So, anyway, if emotionals details in an RPG needs to rest with the player, Why some players feel compelled to create a list of changes related on scenes romances if not actually affect at all the end of the story?
I think it is important for the game to show these scenes in order to get the emotional response from player in the first place. What is important for an RPG is to show those scenes in a way that it will leave a choice for each player on how to interpret them and what kind of emotional response will they provoke. The game doesn't necessarily need to always tell exclusively how Geralt feels in each situation, it should let the player decide depending on their own moral rules or preferences or whatever criteria someone might use.

For example, a scene with Triss will get a player who prefers her more emotionally invested than a scene with Yen,and he will interpret it differently than someone who doesn't like Triss, same goes for someone who likes Yen more, but it is crucial for those scenes to be there in the first place in order to give the player a point of emotional dilemma.
 
Last edited:
I think it is important for the game to show these scenes in order to get the emotional response from player in the first place. What is important for an RPG is to show those scenes in a way that it will leave a choice for each player on how to interpret those scenes and what kind of emotional response will it provoke. The game doesn't necessarily need to always tell exclusively how Geralt feels in each situation, it should let the player decide depending on their own moral rules or preferences or whatever criteria someone might use.

For example, a scene with Triss will get a player who prefers her more emotionally invested than a scene with Yen,and he will interpret it differently than someone who doesn't like Triss, same goes for someone who likes Yen more, but it is crucial for those scenes to be there in the first place in order to give the player a point of emotional dilemma.

Isn't the game plot about Geralt and his doubts and issues and troubles and decisions? So explaining how a psicologic shock like recovering his memories and facing the naked true is less important that Geralt had lost them? All the CDPR TW saga is based in the lost of this memories and now, it the final episode, an explaination about how he faces their recovering can be ignored so easily?... Changing one second female character is more inmersive than the knowlodge of the own main character's reasons for this choice?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom