melmer

The Witcher 3: What Geralt Wants

Recommended Posts

I just finished this over the weekend. I did pretty much everything which speaks to how much I enjoyed it considering the size of the game. The writing is good and the world feels real, instead of just a sandbox for the player to be the lord of. The various witcher contracts got a bit repetitive (talk to guy, go to spot and use witcher senses, go kill monster), but they're all framed with little unique narratives that flesh the world out a bit so I still enjoyed doing them. I'd advise against doing a bunch in a row though.

 

Ending talk:

I feel like they didn't develop the White Frost enough over the course of the game, so Ciri's decision to "fight" it came out of nowhere. I got that it's this force that freezes worlds but considering the most pivotal moment in the game revolves around it, it could have been fleshed out a lot more. What does fighting it even mean? I assume this was the calamity facing Avvalac'h's world but is that ever explicitly stated? It just felt like a weird misstep.

 

I really liked the epilogue (I got the "Ciri becomes a witcher" plus Nilfgaard wins and cedes Temeria). Geralt and Ciri's relationship was so well done. I do wish there had been an actual cutscene for the Geralt and Triss/Yen conclusion though. Oh well...

 

Misc stuff:

-Wanna murder Roach. As soon as you leave the roads he starts acting like an idiot, stopping and turning all over the place. I hate him.

-The weapon/armor loot and crafting outside of witcher gear was kind of a waste. It was almost never as good as witcher gear and I just sold it all. "Thanks for the cool family heirloom, guy!" *Sells to blacksmith for $300*

-On the other hand, I really liked how each upgraded version of witcher armor wasn't just flashier but looked like actual better armor, with added chainmail, plating, etc. Very cool.

-I didn't like the skillpoint system. There weren't enough slots plus it seems like you really had to commit to one path if you wanted to unlock the really advanced stuff.

 

Part of me wants to jump right in to the DLC, but after god knows how many hours, I think I'll take a break from witching for a bit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a little torn over the fact that the earlier Witcher games are probably partly responsible for teaching gamers that exploring a romance plot is consequence free (at least, that's the impression I got from all 6 hours of the first Witcher game I played) and you can go ahead and flirt with everyone on the Normandy without a single citation from Citadel HR.

 

That is definitely the case. Not only does Witcher 1 allow you to bang everything that moves (you can hook up with Triss after banging half the country, then bang the other half and there's no consequences), it has its own threesome.

 

Some Bioware games (DA1, ME1) have tried to handle this case. If it looks like you're trying to start a relationship with multiple characters, they'll confront you. However, they simply ask you to pick one of them, so it's not exactly a punishment, and it has also suffered from serious implementation problems that tend to cause it to trigger even when you were definitely not romancing both characters.

 

I'm not sure how to feel about the game calling the player out on questionable romantic behaviour given the series' history of accepting such things. It would be like if the latest Call of Duty suddenly turned into Spec Ops: The Line and started being upset with the player for their violence. It also feels a bit hypocritical to call out the player, given some of the male-gazey camera angles and gratuitous nudity in some of W3's scenes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel great about it, because you're playing a character, and interacting with other characters who also have relationships outside of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe my favorite gaming-adjacent experience this year has been reading internet posts about a particular aspect of the romance subplots in this game. Specifically:

 

The number of people running into the "threesome" scene. If you have Geralt tell Yennefer and Triss that he loves them both, they will trick Geralt into a threesome where they tie him to a bed and leave him overnight. You completely miss out on part of Geralt's epilogue, because his two major romantic interests in the Witcher fiction both reject him. They don't do this until a dozen or so hours after you would have made the relevant decisions. I especially like that the relevant decision point isn't having sex with either of them (having sex with anything willing seems to be Geralt's SOP), but specifically having Geralt express his love to two different women who clearly resent that Geralt once had a relationship with the other.

 

I'm a little torn over the fact that the earlier Witcher games are probably partly responsible for teaching gamers that exploring a romance plot is consequence free (at least, that's the impression I got from all 6 hours of the first Witcher game I played) and you can go ahead and flirt with everyone on the Normandy without a single citation from Citadel HR. but it was nice to see a video game wiling to call the player out on some pretty questionable behavior.

 

So Shani is never really an option then I guess? I chose her in Witcher 1 and then was sort of disappointed that they're pushing Triss so hard for the first couple chapters of Witcher 2, I guess that's the way of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is definitely the case. Not only does Witcher 1 allow you to bang everything that moves (you can hook up with Triss after banging half the country, then bang the other half and there's no consequences), it has its own threesome.

 

Some Bioware games (DA1, ME1) have tried to handle this case. If it looks like you're trying to start a relationship with multiple characters, they'll confront you. However, they simply ask you to pick one of them, so it's not exactly a punishment, and it has also suffered from serious implementation problems that tend to cause it to trigger even when you were definitely not romancing both characters.

 

I'm not sure how to feel about the game calling the player out on questionable romantic behaviour given the series' history of accepting such things. It would be like if the latest Call of Duty suddenly turned into Spec Ops: The Line and started being upset with the player for their violence. It also feels a bit hypocritical to call out the player, given some of the male-gazey camera angles and gratuitous nudity in some of W3's scenes.

The impression I get from Bioware games is if you actually pursue different romances to the point that you trigger a confrontation, it's just an A/B choice where B apologizes for getting in the way of your relationship with A, because B is just happy to be on the team. Maybe they call out the player in one line of dialogue, but their approach toward the player doesn't actually change. There's a lot I like about those games, but the romance plots are definitely not part of it.

 

I do think the Witcher 3 is at least internally consistent: Meaningless sex can feel gross and transactional (part of why I stopped playing the first Witcher game), but at least all parties are up-front about what is going on. At the start of the game Geralt seems to be on the outs with Triss and Yennefer, and all his flings are either prostitutes or totally uninterested in a romantic relationship with him. It's another thing to actively lead on two women who specifically brought up how they were hurt by Geralt's relationship with the other by conducting an explicitly romantic relationship with both. It's some 100%-pure Colombian wish fulfillment, but they're drawing the line between unrealistic fantasy and letting the player be a bastard consequence-free.

 

I feel great about it, because you're playing a character, and interacting with other characters who also have relationships outside of you.

Yeah, that's the upside of this. I think the fact that Geralt is an actual character (even if I think he's kind of a doofus) helps a lot to make Yennefer and Triss feel more specific than your bog-standard RPG romance options. I actually gave some thought to the choice rather than more-or-less arbitrarily picking a romance option to provide More Content for my player-cipher main character.

 

I am a little puzzled that Yennefer wasn't angrier about being magically trapped into a relationship and then immediately dumped as soon as Geralt helped her lift the spell. She's angry, but only angry enough to playfully drop you in a lake if you're a dick about pressing the issue.

 

So Shani is never really an option then I guess? I chose her in Witcher 1 and then was sort of disappointed that they're pushing Triss so hard for the first couple chapters of Witcher 2, I guess that's the way of it?

She's in the first DLC story. I haven't played it, but I get the impression that Geralt's involvement with her is confined to that DLC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The impression I get from Bioware games is if you actually pursue different romances to the point that you trigger a confrontation, it's just an A/B choice where B apologizes for getting in the way of your relationship with A, because B is just happy to be on the team. Maybe they call out the player in one line of dialogue, but their approach toward the player doesn't actually change.

 

Yeah, once the scene finishes, they go back to following the standard dialogue trees as though the confrontation never happened. But that's a problem that plagues the entire RPG industry (and the Telltale choice-chooser industry): You make a choice, the content isn't allowed to branch because creating content is expensive these days, and maybe at a later date you get one scene calling back to the choice you made. Even Witcher 1 suffers this problem with its choices (I quit W3 7 hours in, so I can't comment on it, though I've heard it's similar), they've just figured out that if you put twelve hours between choice and consequence, it helps to dispel the feeling that you're hopping back on the linear rails of the main dialogue tree after every side choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno about the first Witcher. Triss gave me tons of crap for siding with Shani about the boy and it had quite an impact on the ending as well. Regardless, point taken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I brought it up in the episode thread, but thought I might as well mention it here.

 

Am I missing something about the combat? I thought it was crap. I'll happily say I was wrong this whole time and ignorant of why the combat is good in TW3, but overall I felt it was boring, shallow and kinda broken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I came right off Bloodborne into it and it felt sloppy as hell compared to From's games. I could never be quite sure what kind of swing Geralt would do, and I would often not notice I'd been hit. I eventually got okay at it, but only because I learned how to work around its sloppiness, not because I internalized it and felt competent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Theroretically" when the PS4K comes out, will this game just automatically run nicer?

 

If anyone is going to bother making a 4K patch for their game it'll be CDPR right?

 

I want to jump back in at some point, and i think the launch of the 4K would be a nice opportunity if it plays/looks nicer. What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's possible, but not guaranteed. The leaked docs reported by Giant Bomb implied games would need an update to take advantage of the PS4k, but CD Project Red has a pretty good track record of long-term support, and from what I heard the console versions of Witcher 3 could definitely have a smoother framerate, so it might make a nice before/after for Sony to market with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trying to get myself to jump back into this now that Hearts of Stone and Blood and Wine are out, as I've heard good things about both of these. Also I never actually finished the original main quest. It's just hard to get back into a game that you spent 70 hours in a year ago and have now forgotten a lot of the intricacies of!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, after watching some of GB's coverage of Witcher 3, I decided to go back to Witcher 2 and download a weightless mod so I can finally make it through that game. I left off just after the first chapter, and I've had a lot of fun with Chapter 2 so far. I'm also playing on easy, so I can experience the story and get on to the next game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm planning to pick up a monitor tomorrow so I can play the new DLC.

 

 

And so I can get back in to Destiny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just recently picked up both expansions. Hearts of Stone seems very good so far and I'm really excited to get to Blood and Wine. And all the menu improvements are an added bonus. This game is just the best, except for Roach, which is still the worst.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Completed HoS. Some great characters in there. About 15-20 hours into B&W and its sprawling, yeah, but I'm not as invested in the different factions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just finished Blood & Wine. They really turn it around towards the second half of that DLC. I will miss Geralt and his friends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it worth doing the Hearts of Stone and Blood and Wine stuff before finishing the main quest if I haven't done so already, or should I essentially play the content in release order?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Hearts of Stone is kind of standalone but Blood and Wine feels like an epilogue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started playing Blood and Wine a few days ago and I found it really difficult, mostly because it's been such a long time since I've played the game. It throws you into fighting a few boss monsters right away, one of which is basically immune to my basic Witcher fighting strategy (use the Quen shield to tank damage, use the alternate shield to heal when that fails) so I'm a bit stuck. That isn't really the game's problems, but it is a problem with putting out a big piece of content that assumes the player still remembers how to play it after a while away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought the expansion pass recently, to find that I had lost my saves (I had to do a totally clean windows install, and was hoping for cloud saves). I am glad that premade characters are available, but am a bit daunted about spending all those skill points, as I last played 10 months ago and can't remember my build.

I don't fancy putting another 80 hours in, but I think I will start again to get the feel of things, then start with the first expansion :).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm absolutely loving Blood and Wine. I didn't really find jumping back into the combat too bad, it's a fairly simple system. Circle to dodge, square to kill. With a few bells and whistles added here and there which you can pick up slowly again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now