What did you think of the Wild Hunt's portrayal *SPOILERS, of course*

[jj284b]

Wild Hunt intentions are relatively simple - bring slaves to their world, not ordinary ones, but special ones (thus, Geralt and Yennefer qualified for this). Eredin at the other side knew the prophecy, where is stated Ciri's child will conquer worlds, therefore he decides to kill Ciri to make sure their world would survive. But Eredin wasn't just after Ciri, but after all elder blood offsprings... thats why he wanted Alvin.. its quite possible that getting Alvin (and other Elder Blood people) actually helped them to learn how to open portals between worlds, as originally,Wild Hunt was only able to travel the worlds in Specter form...

In books, Emhyr learns about that prophecy as well, and orders to capture Ciri, so he can marry her own daughter, so his offspring might become ruler of the worlds... (which kinda makes empress ending controversial - Geralt would not bring Ciri to Emhyr no matter what..)

So, with this in mind, i wouldn't be surprised, if Witcher 4 main protagonist would be Ciri's son, with Geralt as his tutor and teacher(after all, Witchers age much slower than normal folks, Geralt is supposed to be hundred years old give or take few decades).

 

[CTPhipps]

Interestingly, I DON'T want Eredin to be more sympathetic.

The thing is, I also think he's a really-really badly developed villain who is lost in the sea of Sauron Clones he's traveling with.

Reposted from "The Enhanced Edition" thread:

Why in the world would you want a conversation that makes you want to sympathize with a man who wants to murder your in-game daughter? That strikes me as a really-really poor design decision as this isn't Dragon Age. You're not some generic vanilla protagonist who can give food to the starving one minute then stab someone for looking at you funny the next. The appeal of the Witcher series is that you are immersed in the mindset of a fully developed 3-dimensional character and that includes his love for his child.

It's more like Bioshock: Infinite than Skyrim with a Faceless Genderless Multiple Personality Disorder avatar of the player. Eredin is coming for your family and there should nothing but PURE unrelenting unforgiving HATE for this man.

No compromise, sympathy, or mercy possible.

The problem is Eredin doesn't invoke that sort of overwhelming HATE either. He invokes "Meh" and that's the wrong emotion. Handsome Jack made the player characters want to go to his home and beat him to death with a lamp. Comstock is the kind of guy you wanted to drown in his own baptismal font, even if you were religious.

Players should feel that killing Eredin's entire race is worth it if it gets you to kill him in order to protect Ciri--and that should be kind of horrifying yet awesome.

Honestly, I'm not sure how to get that sort of emotion, but it's what I would want.

 

[Tishen-13]

They should have been eased into the game a lot better. There should have been more suspense, more build up, more hype. Having said that The Wild Hunt is clearly superior to Corypheus & Co. The Wild Hunt is portrayed well, but they would have been much better.

 

[CTPhipps]

They should have been eased into the game a lot better. There should have been more suspense, more build up, more hype. Having said that The Wild Hunt is clearly superior to Corypheus & Co. The Wild Hunt is portrayed well, but they would have been much better.

Corypheus was a generic doomsday villain but you had the idea that he had a coherent motivation: He found out that his God (Dumat) didn't seem to exist and decided that he wanted to live in a world with a God or not at all (which is an interesting religious supposition). He also had a wide variety of lieutenants with scummy (that psycho Tevinter), well-intentioned ones (Alexis), and sexy ones (The Duchess). Plus, Samson, who is one of the few people I feel good about having vivisected.

Everyone in the Wild Hunt is Sauron, Sauron Lite, Sauron the Wizard, and Sauron the Lite 2.

My Inquisitor was a highly religious Andrastian who believed he was the Chosen of her as well as the idea this Mark was a gift from the Maker. Thus, he had a crisis of Faith when Corypheus revealed it wasn't--only for him to eventually decide he believed anyway. I got an immense sense of satisfaction from killing Corypheus at the end.

"Where is your Maker now?"
"Within me!"
So, yeah, Corypheus was a better villain for me than Eredin because at least I felt EMOTION fighting him.

 

[TudorAdrian]

Interestingly, I DON'T want Eredin to be more sympathetic.

The thing is, I also think he's a really-really badly developed villain who is lost in the sea of Sauron Clones he's traveling with.

Reposted from "The Enhanced Edition" thread:

Why in the world would you want a conversation that makes you want to sympathize with a man who wants to murder your in-game daughter? That strikes me as a really-really poor design decision as this isn't Dragon Age. You're not some generic vanilla protagonist who can give food to the starving one minute then stab someone for looking at you funny the next. The appeal of the Witcher series is that you are immersed in the mindset of a fully developed 3-dimensional character and that includes his love for his child.

It's more like Bioshock: Infinite than Skyrim with a Faceless Genderless Multiple Personality Disorder avatar of the player. Eredin is coming for your family and there should nothing but PURE unrelenting unforgiving HATE for this man.

No compromise, sympathy, or mercy possible.

The problem is Eredin doesn't invoke that sort of overwhelming HATE either. He invokes "Meh" and that's the wrong emotion. Handsome Jack made the player characters want to go to his home and beat him to death with a lamp. Comstock is the kind of guy you wanted to drown in his own baptismal font, even if you were religious.

Players should feel that killing Eredin's entire race is worth it if it gets you to kill him in order to protect Ciri--and that should be kind of horrifying yet awesome.

Honestly, I'm not sure how to get that sort of emotion, but it's what I would want.

Funny enough (considering last days' posts), I agree with you. I don't want to sympathize with a murderer/villain but said villain needs to be portrayed in such a way that I actually need to look forward to clashing my sword with him and ending his miserable existence > Give me a villain I have reasons to fear, someone who genuinely harms the ones Geralt cares about, a villain who actually has a personality and I'd be glad to take care of him & feel invested!

 

[CTPhipps]

How amazing, we have multiple opinions on different subjects that sometimes clash and sometimes agree.



But, yeah, I think part of the issue with the Wild Hunt is they overstay their welcome. The Battle at Kaer Morhen is an okay finale for them. They attack en masse and you get your own personal Battle of Helm's Deep which results in the death of Vesemir. The problem is, after you defeat them, they're no longer an invincible mysterious threat but guys you sent packing.

It's also the fact that they only have one real villain in Eredin and they keep repeating him. You kill a Black Armored Sauron EXPY in the Elven Ruins with Keira Metz, you kill a Black Armored Sauron EXPY a hundred times at Kaer Morhen, you kill one at the Witches' Sabbath, you kill one on the ice, and you kill him again on the boat.

I can't help if it would be better if there was only Eredin for all the various confrontations throughout the game and you face him multiple times over the game only for him to escape. That has its own flaws but, at least, he'll be fully developed. Hell, it'd be almost INTERESTING if you burn his face off at the Witches' Sabbath and he wants to kill you now as much as the reverse.

That's the problem of Imlerith, really, as he's the guy who murdered Geralt's adoptive father/Obi-Wan Kenobi. Eredin really is a chump compared to that kind of emotion and he's dealt with offhandedly.

 

[mmasc4492]

I think that they should have explained the goal of the Wild Hunt better. I have read the books and I know that the Wild Hunt (and Avallach) wanted Ciri to have a child with the king of the Alder Folk. They believed that they could use the power of this child to re-open the "Great Gate" in which they would be able to freely travel between time and space like Ciri can. It is safe to assume that Eredin is chasing Ciri now for the same reason, except to have a child with him instead of the king (since he assassinated him). They just made it seem like Eredin and the Red Riders are "bad guys" who want to kill Ciri. Also, the games are sequels to the books, but are technically non-canon, so that also is a good way to explain why the wild hunt does not really fit the lore that well.

---------- Updated at 05:37 AM ----------

Wild Hunt intentions are relatively simple - bring slaves to their world, not ordinary ones, but special ones (thus, Geralt and Yennefer qualified for this). Eredin at the other side knew the prophecy, where is stated Ciri's child will conquer worlds, therefore he decides to kill Ciri to make sure their world would survive. But Eredin wasn't just after Ciri, but after all elder blood offsprings... thats why he wanted Alvin.. its quite possible that getting Alvin (and other Elder Blood people) actually helped them to learn how to open portals between worlds, as originally,Wild Hunt was only able to travel the worlds in Specter form...

In books, Emhyr learns about that prophecy as well, and orders to capture Ciri, so he can marry her own daughter, so his offspring might become ruler of the worlds... (which kinda makes empress ending controversial - Geralt would not bring Ciri to Emhyr no matter what..)

So, with this in mind, i wouldn't be surprised, if Witcher 4 main protagonist would be Ciri's son, with Geralt as his tutor and teacher(after all, Witchers age much slower than normal folks, Geralt is supposed to be hundred years old give or take few decades).

The Wild Hunt does actually take normal people into their world to be slaves. In the last book when Ciri is in their world she comes across human slaves, nothing special about them. Geralt and Yennefer were taken by the Wild Hunt as a way to draw Ciri out of hiding

 

[goopit]

I'm just disappointed we didn't see the wild hunt as spectres speeding across the sky would be cool to see them in-game as some random event or cutscene

 

[numibago]

As many have said before, the Wild Hunt and Eredin more specifically, are rather underwhelming as antagonists. Sure it wouldn't make much sense to have Eredin engage in a long conversation with Geralt right before their final showdown, but some things could have been done to make Eredin feel at least more frightening as an enemy or at the very least someone who pissed Geralt for more than the whole "chasing your daughter by choice anywhere she goes" reason. Sure he might have taken Yennefer away from him along with chasing Ciri, but we can't forget that Eredin gladly accepted Geralts exchange for Yennefer as a rider of the Wild Hunt. That reason alone should be enough to warrant a much deeper connection between the 2 of them. After all Geralt did ride with them for a while which makes certain dialogues in the game even more ridiculous. At least Eredin and his generals seem to know Geralt is a witcher which should in turn let them have some basic knowledge about his fighting skills. And yet, when Imlerith dies he asks Geralt "Who taught you to fight like that?"... Makes no sense to me. Is it possible that during Geralts time with the Hunt they never saw him fight? Did he fight in a different way while being part of the Wild Hunt?
It's also strange how Geralt wouldn't want to know more about his time with the Hunt. He asks Avalach about some of it but even then there's no real explanation about it other than letting you know Ciri fought Eredins projection to save Geralt from the Hunt.
Another thing that makes no sense is that if the Wild Hunt was always a few steps behind Ciri, nearly catching her a few times, how can Eredin not know that Geralt is searching for her and do something about it? Why would he be so passive when he knows what Geralt is capable of, after fighting him several times, at the Hanged Man's Tree and at the end of W1. He didn't even so much tried to haunt Geralt in his dreams as a projection or a wraith even. It just looks like none of them gives a thought about Geralt until he goes on the offensive with Ciri. Makes no sense to me really, and in this aspect the Wild Hunt in W1 was far more terrifying and ominous in a story where they're supposed to be the biggest threat.
Would have been much better, in my opinion, if Eredin put as much effort into undermining Geralts quest to find Ciri as much as he put into hunting her down. And by that i don't mean having to fight the Hunt everywhere you went or fighting them all the time, but at the very least have some interaction between Geralt and Eredin during Geralts quest to find Ciri. After all Eredin did say Geralt was his champion in W1 and something along the lines that everyone around him died and suffered and his choices ended up doing more harm than good.
The game is very good, don't get me wrong, especially compared to most recent games, and it's definetely one of the best RPG's ever made but the whole Act 3 seems rushed and uninspired. There are so many sad and emotional scenes up to the battle of Kaer Morhen where one can see how deeply Geralt cares for Ciri that not having Eredin trying to make Geralt doubt himself in his quest to find her seems like a poor contrast. Eredin messing around with his mind and feelings during the game would have made that final battle much more intense and would put more emphasis on stopping Eredin and his riders once and for all.


As a side note, what's the point of giving Eredin 2 swords if he only ever uses 1? I expected him to start slashing and spinning with both blades once he opens the portal, maybe even having Geralt use both steel and silver swords to fight him (much in the style of one of the W2 flashback scenes)

 

[Glaedr]

For those of you that havent read the books: The wild hunt are elves, they are portrayed accuratly in accordance to lore.
And whatt game would it be if they were in spectral form all the time, geralt wouldt have been able to kill them, only drive them away, wich is no solution at all, i was okay with the wild hunt Tbh.

 

[numibago]

For those of you that havent read the books: The wild hunt are elves, they are portrayed accuratly in accordance to lore.
And whatt game would it be if they were in spectral form all the time, geralt wouldt have been able to kill them, only drive them away, wich is no solution at all, i was okay with the wild hunt Tbh.

You are right, and reading the books isn't necessary to know the Hunt are elves since that much is said during W2 flashbacks. Geralt even says that they can be cut down and blood flows under their skeletal armor which means they're no wraiths at all. That's completely fine with me. That doesn't change the fact that Eredin should have been much more active in undermining Geralts effort to find Ciri since their motives to find her are pretty much the opposite of one another.
Eredin should have tried to mess around with Geralt's feelings towards Ciri and Yennefer at the very least, giving him horrifying visions/dreams of them being abducted by the Hunt, maybe forcing him to relive his memories of taking Yennefer away from him when Ciri left them in the island after the Rivian Pogrom.
This doesn't happen and in the end even Imlerith seems to provoke more of an emotional reaction from both Geralt and Ciri than Eredin ever does.
Honestly when Avalach says that when they called the Hunt with the Sunstone it was a trap and they had to flee, i expected the Hunt to take Ciri and force her to open the gate rather than having the whole White Frost thing going on.

 

[mad9]

Well, they aren't portrayed as generic evil dudes if we take Avallach and the visit to their homeworld into account. The problem is the titular Wild Hunt is basically just the Stormtroopers of the Wild Hunt.

I also feel like we're missing large chunks of conversations with Avallach too.

Like, if they want us to save their race, WHY THE HELL CAN'T WE WORK SOMETHING OUT? I mean, I get Ciri is the Chosen One but it's not like she wouldn't help if asked.

Hell, it even ends with Ciri doing exactly that.

It's problematic when the villains motivation is entirely superfluous. It's like Luke Skywalker being hunted down by a bunch of Jedi to get him to fight Darth Vader.

Very good point mate. You spend an entire game trading favors and in the end you go full berserker. Geralt himself is once a rider. I don't see why they cannot at least try talk things out, just unfitting with the general world view of the game.

 

[sidv88]

And yet, when Imlerith dies he asks Geralt "Who taught you to fight like that?"... Makes no sense to me. Is it possible that during Geralts time with the Hunt they never saw him fight? Did he fight in a different way while being part of the Wild Hunt?

I thought this cutscene was funny, from a gameplay point of view. The Wild Hunt probably watched Geralt fight the way Sapkowski writes him: efficient moves, speed so fast like a blur, and straight up overpowering enemies.

The way I had Geralt fight against Imlerith required a LOT of rolling, repeatedly using Quen, drinking potions, and rolling around some more. Oh yeah, he did whack Imlerith with his sword occasionally in all of this.

This utterly bizarre, yet ultimately effective, fighting style was perfected by Geralt with Vesemir and was used by my Geralt throughout the Salamandra and Kingslayer crises. Imlerith had only witnessed Geralt's Sapkowski-written "book" fighting style in the past, and was completely unprepared for a Geralt that rolled around way too much and over-relied on Quen.

 

[CTPhipps]

Very good point mate. You spend an entire game trading favors and in the end you go full berserker. Geralt himself is once a rider. I don't see why they cannot at least try talk things out, just unfitting with the general world view of the game.

I don't have a problem with them being Elf NazisTM actually. The problem is this element isn't spelled out in the game and they lack all of the delightful hate of the Thalmor from Skyrim.

We needed them to point out, "We will come to your world and kill all of the races on it but a small few we'll keep as slaves. THAT is why we need Ciri and when the White Frost comes, we'll have bred her children so we can conqueror and genocide OTHER worlds."

Something like that.

Instead, the Wild Hunt's evil is totally Weak TeaTM.

I'm not saying make Eredin Handsome Jack but make him irredeemable and us love (to kill) him for it.

 

[AVMC]

Interestingly, I DON'T want Eredin to be more sympathetic.

Why in the world would you want a conversation that makes you want to sympathize with a man who wants to murder your in-game daughter? That strikes me as a really-really poor design decision as this isn't Dragon Age.

I know this was a couple days ago, but didn't read til now. I understand this sentiment. But, this is also a game/world in which almost no choice you make is "right" or "wrong". It's about realizing that even though things can turn to shite and good people will die, Geralt [you as the player] have to come to terms with the choices you make. It's like Zoltan says in W1, even if people are doing what they think is right, when you get them all together, "no one should be suprised at all the shit."

I also think that there are almost ZERO villians that don't have some redeeming quality. I feel that it's conflict between the desires, and the methods to achieve them, that bring about great drama. A villain can be written such that you absolutely hate him for your reasons, while still being presented with information that explains that he [Eredin in this case] is more than what we get in this game.

In W3, he's a one trick pony who's just bad... oh so bad... see, he's bad, you should hate him. 'Cause, you know, he's after your daughter that you didn't know you had until now and don't know why you actually care about her as a daughter. But, dude, he's so bad.

 

[CTPhipps]

I also think that there are almost ZERO villians that don't have some redeeming quality. I feel that it's conflict between the desires, and the methods to achieve them, that bring about great drama. A villain can be written such that you absolutely hate him for your reasons, while still being presented with information that explains that he [Eredin in this case] is more than what we get in this game.

Whoreson Junior
Menge
Radovid

The odd thing? I actually LIKED Whoreson Junior as a character because it was nice to stab someone without guilt. I guess on my end, I would have liked to have them play up the horrific elements of the Wild Hunt.

That they're racist psychopaths who will exterminate humanity the same way the worst of humanity would destroy the elves and that Ciri can't be allowed to fall into their hands because, well, they will use that power to eradicate this world and others.

But I understand why people would be like, "We're dying, dude! HELP US!"

 

[AVMC]

Whoreson Junior
Menge
Radovid

Let me rephrase that. I also think that there are almost ZERO villains that don't have some redeeming quality, the sad part is we don't always get that kind of depth.

I'm not saying characters can't be just pure evil. And, some are portrayed that way. But, writing those characters to not have motivations of their own, even sick twisted ones that might seem good to them and the people they help, is just bad writing.

The "redeeming" qualities don't have to be redeeming to us, but it'd be nice if in-depth motivations were there.

 

[Aryvandaar]

I really like the concept and the execution is good, but I think that CDPR should flesh it out some more, some backstory to it, and more information in the form of additional content.

As an elf lover in fantasy it would be awesome to get some more information and back story about the elves and their world.

 

[TudorAdrian]

Let me rephrase that. I also think that there are almost ZERO villains that don't have some redeeming quality, the sad part is we don't always get that kind of depth.

I'm not saying characters can't be just pure evil. And, some are portrayed that way. But, writing those characters to not have motivations of their own, even sick twisted ones that might seem good to them and the people they help, is just bad writing.

The "redeeming" qualities don't have to be redeeming to us, but it'd be nice if in-depth motivations were there.

Exactly. You don't need to sympathize or feel compassion for the villain/antagonist (Letho was an exception here) but the player needs to be provided a well enough rounded background on his nemesis so that you can feel some sort of accomplishment when laying him down to rest. Overall, I feel that The Wild Hunt should have had a lot more presence in the game...like even when you're just out roaming the fields at night, maybe seeing the cavalcade race across the sky (hearing a shriek or something ghastly like), have random Wild Hunt minions spawn up randomly throughout your quests through their portals trying to slay you, give Eredin, Caranthir and Imlerith some cutscenes where they get to exchange some lines between themselves, add some more secondary quests tied to the folk's lore about the Hunt (like some ancient burial places etc.) where Geralt tries to find the last bits and pieces of information for getting his memory fully restored .This was another plot hole in the main story..we never get any enlightenment on what it actually meant for Geralt to regain his memory, what did he actually remember, what did he do with the Hunt ..I doubt Eredin and his crew held Geralt as one of their regular foot-soldiers/lackeys..I suspect he played a more important role in the Red Riders and it would have been cool to find out if Geralt followed the Wild Hunt's plans against his will (forced/blackmailed somehow) or if he had a plan all along after trading himself for Yennerfer and the circumstances under which he got away (I would have liked to see Eredin actually fleshing out his plan in a cutscene or something, allowing Geralt to somehow escape to lure Ciri to him)...