I don't think that's because of her not being in the first two games, but the way she is. If you're gonna faithfully represent a character like Yen(I think CDPR did a great job), she is bound to rub some people the wrong way, it's just how her personality is.
I can agree partially here because her development as a character was huge and a main aspect of the books since the Last Wish till the ending of Lady Of The Lake, she changed and have shown more than once her complete love for Geralt and Ciri, things that a lot of people who just played the game really doubt. That's why I said is not completely fair with the lore. Even so, there was have people who wouldn't like her personality and that' is completely fine by me. My problem is with people who misundertood her, Ciri's and Geralt characters and use their game experience to bash Yennefer. Agree that she isn't the prototype of a beloved character, but she is very misunderstood cause they way the devs wrote her. My intention is not make a point that the devs should have wrote her in a way to everybody love her, but in a way to be more accurate and fair with the lore stablished.
Even within TW universe, she is misunderstood by many people and Geralt is one of the few who really understands her.
People also misunderstood that, and sees her acting too cold towards him but mostly with Ciri. I completely understand why she can be harsh and straight to the point, but I can't agree with the fact of she being cold and distant from them most of the time. There wasn't time because of the main plot involving Ciri's life? There wasn't, but that's why I said the should have introduced her before, with time and development.
Come on, CDPR isn't responsible for whatever some nutcase writes on youtube, tumblr, etc...
But they are responsible for the way they wrote the game.
And lets not even pretend people who bash Yennefer are the only ones who acts like idiots.
One never said that, but let's also not pretend that Yennefer it is not the character who gets the most hate after W3, agree with Hamilton that she isn't the best example of material to love but she definetely is not the material to be hated like that aswell. I don't have any problem with people hating her if all the cards are over the table, if the person adressing her criticism and thoughts knows what she is talking about and understand her character. When one uses logic and reason there is no room for an arguing and misunderstanding. But that's not the case with the majority who don't like her, and the games has their fair amounth of blame on that, imo. At the very least they don't help with it.
I think that there is two huge aspects that generates the hate from the games and it bothers me.
First: the devolpment of Yen's character missing in the game. The development factor that she went through the whole books is simply fantastic and it should be portrayed somehow, they should have putted some minor version of it in the games. You can argue that there isn't time, well three games are better than one to portray
the second most important character of the saga who has a huge development in the stablished lore. The reader can easily disagree and doubt Yen in the short stories, even hate her, but at the ending of LoTL? No one can deny that she went through a deep development and is cristal clear about her feelings. Without the simple fact that she doesn't has a proper introduction there, about her past and etc. Most characters don't have also a huge introduction in the games besides Geralt itself, but none are as important, has a main role in the plot, as she is. Or are as controversial as she is, you can't put her in the same sack, imo. Ciri has also a huge importance in the lore/plot and doesn't have an exactly introduction, but she is not complex and controversial as Yen is.
People should have read the books before playing the games to understand her (or even after)? I disagree, like I said they are very different medias and it is a fact that most people who played the games won't read all the books. We, people who participate in the forum and are more passionate about it are the huge minority. Most of us read or are reding the books and have the knoledge to have a proper opinion about it. That's why although they are a non-canon and a role-play game, they must walk with their own legs and at the same they need to be fair with the characters because it is a direct continuation of the books.
Second: they only show one side of Yen's character, the savage motherly one who is ready to destroy the world for her beloved child, you have just minor glimpses of her personality in less critical situations, like in The Last Wish quest and in Vizima. This is partiality, imo. Her behaviour in the game makes sense with the character? Yes, but that doesn't mean she have the fair amount of screen-time and development, specially to non book readers, the thousand of ones who were introduced to The Witcher in that moment. The less screen-time you give to a character the less opportunities you have to portray his personality, as we are talking about the second most important and a very deep one, little screen time it is unfair.
I agree with that:
Sure, there are many other ways Yennefer could have been introduced earlier. Just not as many that makes the eventual choice between her and anyone else particularly plausible.
The story of first two games was written in such way that allowed them to present someone else in addition to Yennefer as a valid option in the third.
But I disagree here:
Providing believable choices & consequences should be a top priority (though admittedly, that often wasn't the case in TW3).
And seems we disagree because a matter of priority. To you, in a non-canon and role-playable game (basically what I said, entertaining purposes) that is a continuation from a stablished lore the priority should be the choices-consequeces first. I love that aspect of pretty much any game I play (that's why I love Telltale games, for example) and that's why I said that if this was their pritority they should have went for a complete rebot.
I believe that the top priority in Wicther games should be the lore and the characters as we are talking about a direct continuation from a stablished lore, but see that one thing don't invalidate the other, you could put those two aspects to work together just like the example I gave. So, as you have the most important characters after the main one such as Yen and Ciri vanished from two games just because of entertaining purposes I think is very unfair with both but mainly with Yen who is complex and controversial, cause of this it is natural that she suffers all this misunderstanding.
Sorry for the huge post btw. :geraltthatsgood:
---------- Updated at 06:17 PM ----------
But to me, there was no 'growth', or enough of a growth in half the game to show what Yen's character was really like, especially towards Geralt. This is game only of course. Take Yen's letter and compare it to Triss. Triss wonders how Geralt's is doing, when he is going to come back to her, etc. Yen was like 'here's some information, best of luck and take care'. Not to mention they sorta mangled her relationship with Ciri (and gave her mentor status to avalach for some reason).
This is also a perfect example of what I'm talking about.
