I also consider CDPR creators
Sapkowski = canon creator;
CDPR = non canon creator.
Sorry, don't get me wrong, but looks like you don't really understand what canon and non canon means. A canonic story it is more important than a non canonic, may not be to you that looks almost desperate to hold the value of a non canon continuation, because it gives you the opportunity to romance a character that has no chance in the canon universe.
By your logic, nothing that happens in the games is canon.
Because it is not, none of the games are canon and that was said by the writer and by CDPR developers itself, if Sapkowski wants to continue his saga he will probably forget all about what happened in the games. Why? I'll try to explain as simple as possible. Because the games are a non canon adaptation, it is not part of the same universe. The saga of the books has his ending in the canon universe, which is the main one. The games are a non canon paralel universe, where the saga continues and it splits in different lines, according to the players choices. So none of the games happened in the main universe.
So whether you choose Triss/Yen, Empress/Witcher, Rad/Emhyr it is all equally non canon to the books.
In the end of the day, yes. But the world isn't black and white, is it? There is something I call "canon line" or even better, lore friendly. What does it means? Means that you are considering all what happened before the games, you are respecting somehow all the development and evolution of the characters that happened before and trying to stick in the same natural/logical line. You're not erasing all of that just to play the way you think it's the best to you, saying "my Geralt is like this and like that" and not necessarily what the character thinks.
Again, it is open to interpretation and to players make their own choices, so play whatever the way it pleases you the most, but call that "my canon" or "as canon as any other choices" is completely wrong.
Also it is not the same to say my Geralt can become a priest or a vegetable seller or a male concubine at Passiflora or whatever, as those events never take place in the game, unlike his romance with Triss. The games have different creators and they should be respected when we are discussing the events they wrote and thought were possible.
It was just an example, but what about Ciri? You can treat her in an inappropriate way during the whole game, leading her to die (or abandon Geralt and the world) and, consequently, leading Geralt to kill himself. You call that as lore friendly/canon as treating her the way Geralt always treated before? Which ends up giving the players the "happy ending" with her becoming witcheress or emperess. You will agree with: "nah, my Geralt developed and he doesn't care and trust Ciri anymore, so the end she dies is my canon". Can't you see the difference? The logic? There is a canon (or lore friendly, call whatever you like) line. The option where she dies is it valid because it is in the game, but is not the same as the other one...