What's with Yennefer and Emhyr?

[calasade]

Huh? Of course there are some inconsistencies, but not as major- not when it comes to main characters and their motivations. It's CDPR who sometimes doesn't understand Sapkowski's characters and simply can't write them. Dandelion - the most glaring example. Yennefer in some cases as well. Triss, especially in W3.

To me the shared canon ended when TW 1 debuted. You have different media taking different directions and telling different stories, so anything book lore and game lore share now I consider coincidental.

Maybe I could explain this better if not for the pinched nerve. My brain is a bit on the off side thanks to the diazepam.

 

[zappy3]

To me the shared canon ended when TW 1 debuted. You have different media taking different directions and telling different stories, so anything book lore and game lore share now is coincidental to me.

Once again I understand your take on this. But it still does not change the fact that the books are canon in the game universe and that the books ARE part of the characters' past. Say so the many references to the books made in the games.

 

[xxgwxx]

To me the shared canon ended when TW 1 debuted.

No, the games take book as its past - it happened. Everyting in the book universe happened to the game Geralt. They games never deny it, they simply continue the story after the last book. I could agree with you, but I can't when CDPR is constatnly boasting on how they 'respect' and 'love' books and how they don't want to 'disappoint' its fans - which is great of course. Not to mention the dozens of book references. No matter how you slice it - you can't separate those two mediums.

 

[StandardEpiphany]

I thought about saying that, but didn't because I have a tendency to piss off people when it comes to Yen and wanted to avoid any arguments.

I was answering to the post where you mentioned that you never said that Yennefer loves Ciri less than Geralt does. But I take it that you didn't actually mean that? So you think that, based on what is presented in the game, Yennefer's feelings are, in fact, lesser than Geralt's?

 

[calasade]

Huh? Of course there are some inconsistencies, but not as major- not when it comes to main characters and their motivations. It's CDPR who sometimes doesn't understand Sapkowski's characters and simply can't write them. Dandelion - the most glaring example. Yennefer in some cases as well. Triss, especially in W3.

It's CDPR who is "borrowing" characters. They are the ones who take them from the other medium. That's why it's a fanfiction and their 'interpretation'. And that's why the responsibility is on them. If Sapkowski wrote something like that, Yennefer changing her mind about Ciri or whatever bullshit, I wouldn't mind it as much because well - his characters, he knows them best and where to take the story. But when a "borrower" does it..well...

I would have minded Sapkowski doing it more. 1) I expect far better writing from him and 2) his writing Yen doing that would be going out-of-character. A mortal sin for a talented author.

---------- Updated at 12:32 AM ----------

I was answering to the post where you mentioned that you never said that Yennefer loves Ciri less than Geralt does. But I take it that you didn't actually mean that? So you think that, based on what is presented in the game, Yennefer's feelings are, in fact, lesser than Geralt's?

Now not so much because I learned a few things about Yen I didn't know about before thanks to this thread. But yeah, going what's on the game alone with what I'm allowed to see by the path I chose (Triss), Yen comes off as having disingenuous feelings toward Ciri.

Ah, finally. A lucid thought. Maybe that damn diazepam is wearing off.

---------- Updated at 12:40 AM ----------

No, the games take book as its past - it happened. Everyting in the book universe happened to the game Geralt. They games never deny it, they simply continue the story after the last book. I could agree with you, but I can't when CDPR is constatnly boasting on how they 'respect' and 'love' books and how they don't want to 'disappoint' its fans - which is great of course. Not to mention the dozens of book references. No matter how you slice it - you can't separate those two mediums.

I can and do. I must. CDPR's characters are not Sapkowski's. To consider them the same, frankly because of what you stated (that CDPR fails to understand his characters and thus Sapkowski's characters would never do some of the things those written by CDPR do) would be an insult to what Sapkowski wrote.

More than the aforementioned, however, I doubt Sapkowski is going to take what happens in the game and put that in his books as canon. So yeah. Separate.

 

[StandardEpiphany]

I would have minded Sapkowski doing it more. 1) I expect far better writing from him and 2) his writing Yen doing that would be going out-of-character. A mortal sin for a talented author.

---------- Updated at 12:32 AM ----------



Now not so much because I learned a few things about Yen I didn't know about before thanks to this thread. But yeah, going what's on the game alone with the path I chose (Triss), Yen comes off as having disingenuous feelings toward Ciri.

Ah, finally. A lucid thought. Maybe that damn diazepam is wearing off.

Alright, I see.

The problem is that the disingenuousness angle in regards to Yennefer's feelings for Ciri goes so against everything that her character stands for that it simply boggles my mind. Geralt and Yennefer would kill themselves, one another, and the rest of the world for Ciri. To suddenly have one of them turn traitor is, to me, a joke.

 

[calasade]

Alright, I see.

The problem is that the disingenuousness angle in regards to Yennefer's feelings for Ciri goes so against everything that her character stands for that it simply boggles my mind. Geralt and Yennefer would kill themselves, one another, and the rest of the world for Ciri. To suddenly have one of them turn traitor is, to me, a joke.

Now that is bad writing, that someone who took a certain path can get such a different perception about a major character vs. taking another path. At the end of the day, regardless which road a gamer took, the gamer should come with away with a pretty accurate impression of a major character.

 

[Riven-Twain]

I think this conversation may perhaps be straying rather far from the topic. However, since people appear to have much to say, I recommend either bringing the discussion back to Yen and Emhyr specifically, or finding a new thread for the 'canonicity' of the characters. And, as always, a reminder: Please keep remarks respectful, even if you happen to disagree with the expressed opinions and interpretations of others, including those of CD Projekt RED's Writing Team. Thank you.

 

[zappy3]

I
I can and do. I must. CDPR's characters are not Sapkowski's. To consider them the same, frankly because of what you stated (that CDPR fails to understand his characters and thus Sapkowski's characters would never do some of the things those written by CDPR do) would be an insult to what Sapkowski wrote.

Even if you consider that the characters are not the same in the books and in the games, the facts are still the facts. The books are the past. That is a fact. Yennefer endured torture for months to protect Ciri, that is a fact. It has happened to game Yen. The games say so. CDPR says that what has happened in the books has happened in the games universe as well. So even if game Yen is not book Yen she still endured that torture. It is still a fact. So if you want to think that now she would change her mind well so be it but I'd be curious to see how you explain it.

EDIT : sorry did not see the last post before posting, I'll stop now.

 

[calasade]

Even if you consider that the characters are not the same in the books and in the games, the facts are still the facts. The books are the past. That is a fact. Yennefer endured torture for months to protect Ciri, that is a fact. It has happened to game Yen. The games says so. CDPR says that what has happened in the books has happened in the games universe as well. So even if game Yen is not book Yen she still endured that torture. It is still a fact. So if you want to think that now she would change her mind well so be it but I'd be curious to se how you explain it.

I couldn't explain it. There would be no way to explain it. Guess what I feel boils down to is that about the time I reached Novigrad I stopped trusting the writing of CDPR and in my mind completely divorced the characters of the game from those of the books.

---------- Updated at 12:54 AM ----------

And with that I'm out. Pinched nerve is getting to me so time for another diazepam. Oh boy.

Thanks for the great discussion, all. Had a good time with it and learned a few things besides.

 

[Charcharo]

Were Sapkowski the captain of the game-writing ship and we didn't have the inconsistencies we do, I would agree. But he's not. That's like saying Jason Bourne written by Lustbader is the same Bourne written by the original author Ludlum. Or in Fantasy terms, Wheel of Time written by Sanderson vs. Wheel of Time written by Robert Jordan.

So... since Witcher 3 is mostly made by different writers and many different developers to Witcher 2... does that mean Witcher 2 is not canon to Witcher 3?
Does that not invalidate some of your concerns about the game?

The games take the books as canon... not the other way around. You are using the shallow or bad writing you yourself complain from ... in order to argue about complex character relations (that are definitely not canon in the books).

 

[TreesAreCanon]

Ciri knows Yennefer wants the best for her for more reasons than motherly devotion. Ciri's gift. Hence, why Ciri included Yennefer in the list of people who are interested in or use her due to her Elder Blood. I was hoping to find redeeming characteristics in Yen as a mother but was left wanting. Not surprisingly, I found Geralt to be the better parent. He's open with Ciri about who he is and what he's done whereas Yen hides things and discloses only those that put her in a favorable or (at worst) neutral light.

I couldn't agree more. The books left me with an impression that Yennefer only wanted to use Ciri because of her blood and powers... In Baptism of Fire, there are strong hints that she has manipulated both royal and elder blood in order for Ciri to be born - or should I call her Yennefer's weapon of mass destruction and world domination? Have you read Tower of Swallow? Yennefer teamed up with Vilgefortz and not only have they tried to imprison poor Ciri, those freaking bastards also wanted to steal her babymakers. The only person who truly cared for Ciri in the books was Triss with her nice and comfy Kovir plan. Ciri could have married Tancred and become the princess of Kovir. Strong political position with allies and friends to protect her. Unfortunately, the vile necromancer Yennefer got her filthy hands on Ciri in the end.

Yennefer and Emhyr were the definition of true love since TW2 and you could see sparkles between them in the books.

:envy::stoptrolling:​

My liking Triss and not liking Yen as a romance option...

I have a tendency to piss off people when it comes to Yen...

Maybe I could explain this better if not for the pinched nerve. My brain is a bit on the off side thanks to the diazepam.

Pinched nerve is getting to me so time for another diazepam. Oh boy.

[video=youtube;Is-yZkHh_p8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Is-yZkHh_p8[/video]

Spoiler

:eredinfacepalm::facepalm2:
Don't feed the troll.

Seriously people, I have no idea why is this 'discussion' went for three pages. The party you were trying to 'discuss' with clearly wasn't interested in your opinion and turned around everything you said. Next time save your precious brain cells.

Spoiler

 

[Krull32]

Made my day ... :lol:

Geralt and Yennefer would kill themselves, one another, and the rest of the world for Ciri. To suddenly have one of them turn traitor is, to me, a joke.

 

[Sephira]

If Sapkowski wrote something like that, Yennefer changing her mind about Ciri or whatever bullshit, I wouldn't mind it as much because well - his characters, he knows them best and where to take the story.

Given the previous context, I'd be mad honestly.

:surprise:

 

[sv3672]

I can and do. I must. CDPR's characters are not Sapkowski's. To consider them the same, frankly because of what you stated (that CDPR fails to understand his characters and thus Sapkowski's characters would never do some of the things those written by CDPR do) would be an insult to what Sapkowski wrote.

More than the aforementioned, however, I doubt Sapkowski is going to take what happens in the game and put that in his books as canon. So yeah. Separate.

Regardless of what they claim in PR statements, CDPR do change characters compared to the books, and there are multiple examples of that. It would be rather disrespectful towards them to assume it is all "bad writing", rather than intentional. Not to mention being employed as a writer or quest designer at the company requires familiarity with the books, so I am pretty sure their writers read all of them more than once. The books do serve as the background for the games providing a history of past events, but when the present in the game is different for whatever reason, in my opinion that information takes precedence over the prequels/books.

In any case, from the last few posts, it looks like this thread is heading towards a lock.

 

[Guest 3847602]

The books do serve as the background for the games providing a history of past events, but when the present in the game is different for whatever reason, in my opinion that information takes precedence over the prequels/books.

Yeah, and thanks to this we got: imminent White Frost, trashtalking machine Eredin, imbecile Dijkstra, pyromaniac Radovid, sappy Triss, boring Dandelion, Stockholm syndrome Ciri and a few more diamonds. God bless artistic freedom...
:hatsoff:

 

[calasade]

Regardless of what they claim in PR statements, CDPR do change characters compared to the books, and there are multiple examples of that. It would be rather disrespectful towards them to assume it is all "bad writing", rather than intentional. Not to mention being employed as a writer or quest designer at the company requires familiarity with the books, so I am pretty sure their writers read all of them more than once. The books do serve as the background for the games providing a history of past events, but when the present in the game is different for whatever reason, in my opinion that information takes precedence over the prequels/books.

In any case, from the last few posts, it looks like this thread is heading towards a lock.

Thank you. I tried and couldn't explain some of that regarding how it impacts my view of the differing canon/characters thanks to diazepam-induced fog. Also forgot to mention my take on the canon aligns with Sapkowski's.

"The game - with all due respect to it, but let's finally say it openly - is not an 'alternative version', nor a sequel. The game is a free adaptation containing elements of my work; an adaptation created by different authors," he noted.


"Adaptations - although they can in a way relate to the story told in the books - can never aspire to the role of a follow-up. They can never add prologues nor prequels, let alone epilogues and sequels.


"Maybe it's time to set the matters straight," he went on. "'The Witcher' is a well made video game, its success is well deserved and the creators deserve all the splendour and honour due. But in no way can it be considered to be an 'alternative version', nor a 'sequel' to the witcher Geralt stories. Because this can only be told by Geralt's creator. A certain Andrzej Sapkowski."

Anyway, what I meant to so say is great point about bad writing vs. intent. The term bad writing then is thrown around a little too freely. In this instance, even had CDPR's writers intended to write the characters the same as Sapkowski, they could not because it's impossible for any author to follow what the one before would have done (the point I tried to make when I mentioned Sanderson vs. Jordan and Lustbader vs. Ludlum since Sanderson and Lustbader continued iconic stories of those great authors who had passed on). While what Sanderson and Lustbader have done is admirable, it's not the same story, would not be even had Jordan and Ludlum given Sanderson and Lustbader specific direction.

 

[Charcharo]

Sapkowski is ultimately the person who says what goes in the books. That is true.
But in this case, even if completely inferior to him otherwise, CDPR ARE the ones who say what goes in their games.

That is why I said the games take the books as canon. But the books do not take the games as canon.

As for the games taking precedence over the books in the game universe... I COULD agree IF the games actually had their own canon. Both you SV and Calasade talk about how that is not the case and that in fact we are faced with severe continuity issues. If that is correct and those issues are really so extreme (I partially agree) then why ever discuss using the games as a separate entity with its own canon? Shouldnt the superior work of Sapkowski then be used? I mean it actually has canon... real one.

TLDR:
I strongly disagree. It is simpler to just take it as it is presented that the books are canon to the games. That DOES introduce issues at times, I admit. Especially the White Frost, Ciri/Yennefer, Triss, Geralt... some would argue (though this has more to do with the games) Radovid. But that is overall the better, more logical and consistent choice.

 

[wright1978]

Sapkowski is ultimately the person who says what goes in the books. That is true.
But in this case, even if completely inferior to him otherwise, CDPR ARE the ones who say what goes in their games.

That is why I said the games take the books as canon. But the books do not take the games as canon.

As for the games taking precedence over the books in the game universe... I COULD agree IF the games actually had their own canon. Both you SV and Calasade talk about how that is not the case and that in fact we are faced with severe continuity issues. If that is correct and those issues are really so extreme (I partially agree) then why ever discuss using the games as a separate entity with its own canon? Shouldnt the superior work of Sapkowski then be used? I mean it actually has canon... real one.

TLDR:
I strongly disagree. It is simpler to just take it as it is presented that the books are canon to the games. That DOES introduce issues at times, I admit. Especially the White Frost, Ciri/Yennefer, Triss, Geralt... some would argue (though this has more to do with the games) Radovid. But that is overall the better, more logical and consistent choice.

Disagree you've got to take the books as a steer to game canon but not necessarily so. If the games have Emyhr as single and without mention of false Ciri etc.
The games have their own canon which is further because this isn't a single canon but a myriad of the possible choices that can happen. The books definitely shouldn't be used to try and overwrite the game canon.

 

[Charcharo]

Disagree you've got to take the books as a steer to game canon but not necessarily so. If the games have Emyhr as single and without mention of false Ciri etc.
The games have their own canon which is further because this isn't a single canon but a myriad of the possible choices that can happen. The books definitely shouldn't be used to try and overwrite the game canon.

Well that is more of an issue of the games simplifying for the average gamer. Cutting stuff and making it less complex for a lower end audience. It is to be expected out of video games after all.

However I would still agree with you if it weren't for the fact that Witcher 1, 2 and 3 have continuity issues with their own canon. Even ignoring the books, they just do not have it at all it seems. Something you guys (somewhat rightly) complain about in multiple threads. So in cases where we have terrible writing, holes or something running counter to the superior art form... well you can piece the rest.
Actual well designed video game choices however? When that happens it is great ! Make no mistake.
But it is not what you guys seem to think it is...