Aaden said:Well, at least it seems safe to assume that imported decisions won't have a huge impact, if CDPR still sits on the fence about it, that far into development.
But it's probably not as bad as it sounds: most decisions influenced the political state of the Northern Kingdoms. TW3 is set at and beyond the frontline to Nilfgaard - which attacked the North, no matter the outcome of TW2 - and southern Redania - the most stable of the Northern Kingdoms, with Radovid alive and all.
Furthermore, we know that TW3 will feature a more personal story and won't delve as deep into politics as TW2 did - when it does, I expect it to be strategic decisions regarding the war or political conflicts on Skellige, both of which are not heavily influenced by TW2. Nor is Tretogor part of the game, or any other capital city, which eliminates the necessity of designing great parts of the game with Anais and the current monarchs in mind. Temerian lands that we can roam are war-ridden and in chaos, so that it's not that important who rules there if anyone. For all gameplay purposes, it seems to suffice that some sort of Northern army is involved in the war, without paying too much attention on which Kingdom contributes which part of that army. More in-depth consequences of TW2's decisions could be handled with dialogue, journal entries and occasional side quests.
Yeah, I agree, Witcher 3 will handle Witcher 2's endings like what Witcher 2 handled Witcher 1, which is a big shame, but if it does impact the war in any way and to hear people talking about it in a tavern would be enough for me.
I mean ... The choices in Witcher 2 had such a big influence on the Northern Kingdoms, to see those choices made unimportant to cater to newcomers is just baffling to me.