What do you think about the main story in TW3? Are you satisfied?

[Jou05]

What do you think about the main story in TW3? Are you satisfied?

Question applies to both game fans (TW1-2) and book fans
I imagine TW3 makes for different experiences based on if you read the books or not


I haven't read the books so some things were lost on me
I didn't feel attached to Yen at all (even though the game tried its best to push me to her) and even with Ciri it took some time to get attached to her (still feel like the whole game shouldn't have been about her, she was never even mentioned until TW3)

I also felt that the story was too padded out and fetchy (doing the same old mundane tasks got a bit tiresome) and not very exciting until the second half
I really missed the complex politics of TW2 (here they were very lackluster and Bioware-like)

Still there was some great writing (Baron questline as an example) and overall the story was still good
I do think they focused a bit too much on the open world but thats for another thread

 

[Lesota]

I've read the books.
I really like the main story. Yes, you don't have complex politics but, I think, this game not about it, it's a much more personal story. You are looking for you daughter and helping her to fight against very bad boys. This is all. War, politic it's just a minor theme as it should be. Witcher 2 was about politic, Witcher 3 is not and it's fine for me.
I understand that people who didn't read the books may have trouble to feel attached, but It is a consequence of making game with such a huge pre-history. Yes, you can show something about Dandelion, Triss, Yenn, Ciri but it's just a game, you can't put 5(6?) books of pre-history into it.

 

[Pescador7]

I loved The Witcher 3. For me, it's easily the best game I ever played. But there are some things I didn't liked in the main plot....

I played both first games and loved them. This year I started reading the books... I finished blood of elves, but haven't started the next one. I really enjoyed reading them... But as far as literature goes, I liked the games better.

I think my complaints are the same as everyone else's who played the first two games.

And IMHO the main plot of The Witcher 2 was more interesting. It feels more important, and more easy to care about what's happening.

After leaving Vizima, instead of doing whatever I was told, I began walking around the world and doing random contracts because I couldn't care less about whatever Ms. Bitchyface and emperor whoever told me to do.

I wanted to find Iorveth, Saskia and Roche. I wanted to be with Triss. And I wanted to find out what the fuck happened between the two games, because last time I "was" Geralt, Triss was my lover, Iorveth was my bro, and I had a knife that hopefully could be used to free Saskia. I planned to play a second time importing a savefile with Roche Path, but now I see it's pointless.

Radovid seemed kinda of a decent ruler and no doubt someone to be respected in The Witcher 2, but he became kinda silly in The Witcher 3.

It seems to me the story was focused to make the fans of the books happy. There were lots of references to the books... Probably much more than I recognized since I only read the first ones.

I'm happy that the books were taken into account, but I bet most of the western audience was introduced to the series thanks to the games... So, for us (or for me at least), Triss should had had a bigger role in the plot. She was just a secondary character, and that made me crazy! Because she was so much more interesting than Yen, more likeable, and we knew her better, but we still were forced to tag along with Yennefer during a good part of the game.

Also, the previous game made such a big deal of what happened in Loc Muinne, but our decisions there meant nothing. Heh. There was that big thread in the Witcher 2's forum with people discussing about what paths could make a stronger north and whatever. And in the end, none of that mattered.

 

[Jou05]

^Yeah that is TW3 biggest flaw

They just made a game for book fans and didn't care for fans of TW1-TW2 nearly as much as they should have
(Triss getting shafted, Iorveth and Saskia written off etc.)

 

[kraidy]

My favorite game personally. Sure it has some issues (Saskia, Adda and Anais disappearing) Triss is tacked on (tho at least she didn't get the full Shani treatment) some gameplay hiccups and alot of the North was absent in the war (tho I will praise how CDP handled Nilfgaard at least, you HAVE reasons to help them unlike the past games where I never felt there was any real pros)

However, outside these issues, I enjoyed the game alot. Looking forward to the expansions and other future content. I think thew big reason I did enjoy the game alot more, more then the past games is because I read the books so for me this felt like a true continuation. I can see how this would rub people the wrong way, more so if you don't care for Yen (I love Yen and don't really care for Triss my self) I got what I was promised, a fantastic personal story.

 

[carlos2033]

My favorite game personally. Sure it has some issues (Saskia, Adda and Anais disappearing) Triss is tacked on (tho at least she didn't get the full Shani treatment) some gameplay hiccups and alot of the North was absent in the war (tho I will praise how CDP handled Nilfgaard at least, you HAVE reasons to help them unlike the past games where I never felt there was any real pros)

However, outside these issues, I enjoyed the game alot. Looking forward to the expansions and other future content. I think thew big reason I did enjoy the game alot more, more then the past games is because I read the books so for me this felt like a true continuation. I can see how this would rub people the wrong way, more so if you don't care for Yen (I love Yen and don't really care for Triss my self) I got what I was promised, a fantastic personal story.

Geralt personal story for me is perfect, but like you said we have reason to help nilfgard, but now there is no reason to help north that where game is lack on politics, there is no leser evil nilfgard is good while north is bunch of fanatics

 

[kraidy]

Geralt personal story for me is perfect, but like you said we have reason to help nilfgard, but now there is no reason to help north that where game is lack on politics, there is no leser evil nilfgard is good while north is bunch of fanatics

Yeah CDP dropped the ball on the North politics big time and did a good job on the Nilfgaard side. They really need to patch this up.

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

I have not played it yet, and I will not do so until the expansions are released.

But I've already decided, based on what I have seen, that I will see it as a standalone that has nothing to do with TW2. And I will play TW2 as an isolated game. That way, I can still enjoy it without it feeling like it was thrown aside.

 

[carlos2033]

I have not played it yet, and I will not do so until the expansions are released.

But I've already decided, based on what I have seen, that I will see it as a standalone that has nothing to do with TW2. And I will play TW2 as an isolated game. That way, I can still enjoy it without it feeling like it was thrown aside.

But even as standalone its not explaned why each side win, and skellige ruler unimportant

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

But even as standalone its not explaned why each side win, and skellige ruler unimportant

Isn't "tactical genius" enough of an explanation for you? *sarcasm*

I'll play it as a standalone with mediocre politics at best, and a good personal story.

 

[carlos2033]

Isn't "tactical genius" enough of an explanation for you? *sarcasm*

I'll play it as a standalone with mediocre politics at best, and a good personal story.

Well at least expected some dialogue or something why he is beter, maybe bunch of order knights and why then Djikstra wins without that tactical genius

 

[kraidy]

Eh at least Nilfgaard was much better then the North (outside some small things that would have been even better had the overall quality of the North politics been even passable)

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Eh at least Nilfgaard was much better then the North (outside some small things that would have been even better had the overall quality of the North politics been even passable)

This almost reminds me of bioware trying to make people hate mages and not hate templars.

It's as if CDPR was like "ok we need people to like Nilfgaard, so let's make the North complete shit." No, how about you make a nuanced, complex, and multi-faceted portrayal of both? With their pros and cons, and let players weight them?

 

[kraidy]

This almost reminds me of bioware trying to make people hate mages and not hate templars.

It's as if CDPR was like "ok we need people to like Nilfgaard, so let's make the North complete shit." No, how about you make a nuanced, complex, and multi-faceted portrayal of both? With their pros and cons, and let players weight them?

Because there was no pros and cons in the second game for Nilfgaard. Now I would have preferred if CDP gave us TW2 North and TW3 Nilfgaard but that's asking for too much.

 

[KnightofPhoenix]

Because there was no pros and cons in the second game for Nilfgaard. .

True, but they were not portrayed as shit either. It is more excusable to not explore Nilfgaard that much in the 2nd game, considering the context.
I am very glad they didn't vilify Nilfgaard, in fact that was my biggest concern.

 

[Dylaniskillen]

The ending should let us see everyone, instead it feels lonely, and sad. Knowing Geralts story is over and knowing everyone is pretty much gone, maybe there will be a dlc that is set after the events on the main story? hopefully where we can see Yennefer triss, Eskel.