Yeah, almost like she's one of the more beloved characters in gaming.
Hahaha she's hot, and she's caring and doesn't torment dead bodies and tells you "Good luck" before fighting Eredin because well she probably knows that it's not a tough fight, and the fight isn't even climatic.
I read the books after finishing TW1. I can't see her as really a love/romantic interest since she originally picked the lodge over Geralt and Yen. I'd consider her a friend with benefits.
Well, that's not where she went with it I don't think. The entire point of Triss keeping things from Geralt was to try and get her "second chance." One where she DOES choose Geralt over the Lodge.
Which she does HUGELY in AOK.
Maybe, who can actually tell what goes on inside a woman's head other than herself.
Sadly we digress, let's go back to the wild hunt being unable to live up to the "terrifying" enemy.
I liked the Wild Hunt as enemies and it was fun killing them but they really were personality-less bores.
Also, the final kill of Eredin lacked weight.
He didn't look terrified, beg for mercy, curse us or anything.
Just warned us about Avallach, which turned out to be wrong.
Also, the final kill of Eredin lacked weight.
He didn't look terrified, beg for mercy, curse us or anything.
Just warned us about Avallach, which turned out to be wrong.
one small problem with this all... game is called Witcher 3 Wild Hunt.... not THE Wild Hunt... so it is about the hunt against Ciri than a game that should focus on Eredin... english has those nieche caveats that sometimes are misunderstood by some.. but missing THE, that title name means something different...
https://www.youtube.com/v/P2urvuNksJA?version=3&start=219&end=225&autoplay=1&hl=en_US&rel=0
@GingerEffect: thanks for stoping by!
Last edited:
I've shared my opinion on this topic many times over in a lot of other threads around here and you brought yours up as well so am not going to debate it again here. The game should have treated The Wild Hunt with more attention to detail. If you want to look around and find extenuating circumstances for how the Wild Hunt (and Geralt's nemesis) got shafted out then be my guest and read my last post please ^
Last edited:
Well, I agree@OP
It's just sad what they did to the Wild Hunt. Every secondary character has more dialogue than Eredin, the overarching villain of the trilogy.
But it doesn't surprise me. Just look at the leaked documents. The whole third act was supposed to be dedicated to the Wild Hunt. But unfortunately they cut the Wild Hunt attack on Novigrad and the Search for Caranthir. I wouldn't be surprised if they also cut parts of the other missions (it's strange there is barely any dialogue with Imlerith at Bald Mountain, considering this would have been the perfect opportunity to talk about Geralt's past as a Rider of the Hunt.
Seeing the high quality of the sidequests I'm just wondering why they didn't cut some of them instead. I don't think a quest involving the Wild Hunt would have been more work than a sidequests like Tower of Mice.
It's just sad what they did to the Wild Hunt. Every secondary character has more dialogue than Eredin, the overarching villain of the trilogy.
But it doesn't surprise me. Just look at the leaked documents. The whole third act was supposed to be dedicated to the Wild Hunt. But unfortunately they cut the Wild Hunt attack on Novigrad and the Search for Caranthir. I wouldn't be surprised if they also cut parts of the other missions (it's strange there is barely any dialogue with Imlerith at Bald Mountain, considering this would have been the perfect opportunity to talk about Geralt's past as a Rider of the Hunt.
Seeing the high quality of the sidequests I'm just wondering why they didn't cut some of them instead. I don't think a quest involving the Wild Hunt would have been more work than a sidequests like Tower of Mice.
Last edited:
i think i read some of those, but still i dont agree. The Wild Hunt got enough of attention, as they were not the main antagonists in this game, but just a catalyst of things that will come. The Wild Hunt was handled in books and previous games, so CDPR didnt had to explain their intentions again, same as they didnt spent time to explain who Zoltan, Dantelion or Triss are.. This story was all about Geralt trying to find and save Ciri, and i think it was done quite well. Could it be improved? yes. Is it bad because Eredin got just 12 sentences? NOPE.I've shared my opinion on this topic many times over in a lot of other threads around here and you brought yours up as well so am not going to debate it again here. The game should have treated The Wild Hunt with more attention to detail. If you want to look around and find extenuating circumstances for how the Wild Hunt (and Geralt's nemesis) got shafted out then be my guest and read my last post please ^
and for the title of the game, its just Wild Hunt, therefore it fits the story, about Geralt chasing about Ciri, then hunting the Hunt... game name is not "The Wild Hunt", therefore the Wild Hunt was not necessarily in the center of attention. You got your clues from Geralt perspective ONLY.
Last edited:
sorry, but it seems to me you have.. you have misunderstood the game title and made assumptions based on it.
---------- Updated at 12:41 PM ----------
So, do you see how your topic " Was This Really "The Wild Hunt" and more " is simple... is incorrect?
---------- Updated at 12:41 PM ----------
Game is called Witcher 3 Wild Hunt... not as you say Witcher 3 The Wild Hunt... Do you understand the difference? Witcher 3 THE Wild Hunt would mean game is about THE Wild Hunt... Yet, using just Wild Hunt, authors suggested game is more about WILD HUNTING (something... even the Wild Hunt... after all, final track is called "Hunt or be hunted"..), than actual THE Wild Hunt itself...
So, do you see how your topic " Was This Really "The Wild Hunt" and more " is simple... is incorrect?
Last edited:
...agreed man...though he's kinda right
as-is, the game should have been called The Witcher: A Wild Hunt ! So in game its gonna be like...."a wild EREDIN appeared!"...agreed man...though he's kinda right
Actually... what happened in a game was practically a wild hunting... first to find Ciri, then it was a hunt against The Wild Hunt... taking out Imlerith, Gael, Caranthir and finally Eredin... CDPR nicely played with the game name, yet some people make incorrect assumptions on it, as if the game was supposed to be more about The Wild Hunt, because it has Wild Hunt in the title...
and yes, i think player got enough of info in game, plus, there is a whole novel written about it, so whoever wants to know more, can just simply buy those books and read them... Books are not really needed to play the game, but are definitely needed if you want fully understand the story. Eredin's intentions are explained there quite well.
and i can guarantee you that so far, nobody who liked the games and then read the books was dissatisfied with what Mr Sapkowski wrote..
Last edited:
Please don't make up straw-man excuses for one of the gravest errors in the writing and character development of the Wild Hunt members for this game, especially Eredin. There is no pun here, the Wild Hunt is exactly who we think they are and a lot of the pre-release promotion was focused on them. The "there's a whole book on them" excuse is kind of lame because there are also books on Geralt and witchers, should they have not made any Witcher games at all, then?
How they thought fleshing out Triss even more, despite her getting more than enough screen time in the two previous instalments in the franchise, was more important than fleshing out the Wild Hunt members is really frustrating and it really is a sign they're caving in to pressure from popular demand, even though they fully deny this.
Oh, so why stopping with Eredin then? why not asking for explanation who Dandelion is, or Zoltan, Triss, Yennefer, or any other character well known because of books?
...I think that's taking things a little bit too far.. a bit of a too far-fetched assumption to make here. This is just finding excuses etc. for something that didn't get delivered on story-wise. Again, the books leave off where the game starts (and I can prove for a fact that a lot of people have raised this same topic again & again). I've read Saprowski's books and honestly they kinda go downhill after a certain point. CDPR should have taken their creative liberty to proper rights and flesh the Wild Hunt out after their own guidelines..the Wild Hunt is mentioned in the books but only to a certain point in the plot...there's a LOT of stuff that happened beyond the books which is only ALLUDED to / built up on in W1 and W2 and SHOULD HAVE been developed and properly addressed in Witcher 3: Wild Hunt.
^^What he said^^