13812 réponses à ce sujet

[orbit991]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

I'd say Ioverth's path in creating a whole new multi-racial kingdom in the north is just as equal as saving the Temerian throne with Roche's path saving Anais, if not better (considering a possible Nilfgaardian invasion will happen really soon and Anais is not that capable in both mind and age to govern through that).

Anais is irrelevant. Giving her to Radovid however is as sure as hell not.

I want to see how this so called kingdom of yours will work. You think you just snap your fingers, make some laws and bam you have a multi-racial kingdom. then well frankly you know zero of politics or history.

You bring up and interesting point that the other kingdoms won't support Saskia's kingdom (let's call it the Pontar for simplicity in this conversation) in war. Well that's not the case. Last I recall, Pontar is not at the border of Nilfgaard, that's Lyria and Temeria (if I'm reading the map coorectly). So if Nilfgaard were to invade then the Northern Kingdoms would have to band together, just like they did at Sodden and Brenna.

Lyria and Aedirn are going to fall easily, just like they did last time around, this time even quicker since Lyria was weakened by the old war and Aedirn has no monarch.

The Imperials once reached the Pontar valley, where they only stopped because of a deal with Henselt, they can do so again, and even go beyond this time. Henselt might just launch his second invasion anyway, and if he brings a strong army, not just 2.000 if even less troops, then you can bet Saskia won't stand a chance....

The pro to the newly-formed Pontar is that the North now have the best archers in the known world, the Scoia'tael, not to mention any assets the dwarves can make. With Pontar the terrorist acts of Scoia'tael would be gone, sure there might be possible rogue bands, but not to the degree of full on guerilla war of the past.

England had the best archers in the Medieval world, and they still lost quite a few wars. The real reason it was never conquered it was because of it's Island nation status with no strong foes on the Island...as for the dwarves? What can do they do that is special?

You think 1.000 men is an army? Laughable, that's not an army and furthermore it's not organized. You think they would stand any chance in a pitched battle and not a castle assault?

That battle wasn't won because of Saskia's leadership skill, it was won because Roche had weakened the Kaedweni army with his plot and because Geralt, the badass, was there....why do you think Vergen falls when you fight on Henselt's side?

And to futher strengthen this foresight, Saskia must be pretty stupid if she doesn't aid the rest of the North against a Nilfgaard invasion. And judging from what we learend from Saskia, she's anything but that.

She is pretty stupid if she thinks racial tension can just be melted away just like that.

How exactly is she going to create an army? From what money ....having the richest province in the north doesn't mean anything if you don't have trade, and who is going to trade with her? Kaedwen? Redania ( Radovid would likely have invaded to bring Saskia down from her self proclaimed throne if not for him wanting to split Temeria in two with Henselt )? Aedirn...

She has no economy, no skill for running one, nor does she have the skill for the logistics related to running you army. What you are trying to say is that somehow Saskia's nation would survive because the north would need her help, what I am saying is that ( based on historical evidence ) every single medieval monarch would sooner have cut off his own hand before accepting a peasant on a throne.

Spoiler

Well except that she is a freaking Dragon, she nearly turned the battle around by herself as they said and her focus seemed mostly on Faltest. I'd like to see one of those armies cross a river through a fireball flyby, nevermind hold a castle in one piece. Few puffs and a whole camp would be on fire.

[DragonRageGT]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Anais is irrelevant. Giving her to Radovid however is as sure as hell not.

I want to see how this so called kingdom of yours will work. You think you just snap your fingers, make some laws and bam you have a multi-racial kingdom. then well frankly you know zero of politics or history.

You're surely do no justice to the Avatar you use here. Arcturus Mengsk would suit you much better!

P.S.: I'm really confused right now. I'm at a crossroads and totally unsure which way I want to go. I would love to go on both!

Modifié par RageGT, 11 juin 2011 - 09:41 .

[hangmans tree]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Bejos_ wrote...
 I don't know enough about the Witcher world to make the supposition that there's an analogy to be made, in this case.

Well according to Philippa, royal families are genetically superior to the rest.
But Saskia does not have royal blood IIRC.

Yep, her blood is far more superior...and genetically even cleaner :happy:

[CalJones]

RageGT - make a save, do one, then go back and do the other. You won't get the whole picture until you play both Roche's and Iorveth's paths.

One thing I haven't done on either playthrough is go to save Triss. Despite being female, I'm very much of the opinion, bros before hos. Or at least, stuff that has important political ramifications before, well, love. Especially since I nailed Ves on one playthrough and the succubus on the other.

@Costin - there's also the Stennis factor. He's dead on my Roche playthrough but alive - and king - on my Iorveth playthrough. Despite the fact he comes across as a complete arse, the Act III cutscene describes him as a good and much loved king. I'm not sure how he made such a quick transformation, but there it is. I imagine that would make a difference in any upcoming wars.

[DragonRageGT]

CalJones wrote...

RageGT - make a save, do one, then go back and do the other. You won't get the whole picture until you play both Roche's and Iorveth's paths.

Oh, I have finished both paths already. But I always start from scratch and do things differently. If I just reloaded a key point and went the other way, all choices I made up to that point would be pointless. For instance, if I go Roche's, I go from start and I only will show some respect for Yorweth when he has me surrounded by his archers. Picking the stupid answer at Insane difficulty, well, is insanity! =)

[CalJones]

Ah, I gotcha. I don't have the patience for Insanity modes (well, aside from ME). I'm usually happy with normal on most games as I'm more interested in the story.

[FlintlockJazz]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Iorveth's a radical who hates humans, talk all you will about a solution. It's not going to emerge until he ( and all the Scoia'Tel like him ) die. That is a reality.

I want him dead because he and the Scoia'Tel as a whole made the whole situation much worse then it already was. ( I suggest you read the second witcher novel where Zigrin pretty much says the exact same thing as I am right now ).

Killing someone can be part of a solution, but genocide is never a solution. The humans, for all their racism do not want all elves dead. They want all Scoia'Tel dead ( and I repeat myself, many elves are not Scoia'Tel ) and rightly so, Yes they treat nonhumans as ****, but what do you expect after the Scoia'Tel commit mass murder. Niflgaard was smart to kill so many unit leaders after the war ended.

Right and Wrong don't factor into it. There is being a smart person with a plan ( like Henselt or Dethmold ) and then there is being a complete fool like Iorveth or Yaevinn.

I have already read most of the second book already (well third, Blood of Elves is the third chronologically they just haven't translated the second set of short stories yet annoyingly enough), and Zigrin is just one person stating how he views things, does not make his views the right one.  The whole point is that it's all perspective, for instance you state how else do you expect humans to treat nonhumans when the scoia'tael perform mass murder, but then the scoia'tael perform mass murder BECAUSE of the way humans treat them, the scoia'tael formed BECAUSE of the mistreatment by humans in the first place.  Many humans WOULD commit genocide on the elves, and in fact that is Dethmold's goal and Henselt is helping him.

The hate is cyclical, that is the point the book is trying to make.  Killing off all the scoia'tael will just cause another faction to form to avenge them when you consider that you have just killed someone's brother/sister/father/daughter/shagbuddy.  It's breaking the cycle that needs to be done, and if you kill off all the scoia'tael as a means to solve that then you would need to kill off all the humans on the other side trying to oppress the elves as well, and that's just going to be one hell of a bloodbath.

As for Iorveth being a fool: he holds off on attacking Flotsam because he realises the futility of it, it's stated when talking to Cedric.  The scoia'tael are attempting to reformulate themselves after their betrayal by Nilfgard.  Iorveth has tried the terrorist route and realised that isn't working, and is attempting to find some means that they can continue fighting for their freedom while not being used again like by Nilfgard.  Should Iorveth be held accountable for his murder of innocents?  Yes but then so should all the kings, mercenaries and assorted others you meet in the game.

[YohkoOhno]

So comparing both Ioverth and Roche paths, damn they are very different, I love this game. I agree that Roche's path (somebody in this thread stated before) that you are being tugged mercilessly by the hand of fate. Whereas in Ioverth's path you have more control in what to do (IE saving more).

Yeah, I was the one who said that. After finishing the Roche path, I've decided that I'm going to stick with the Ioverth path when or if there's a sequel or expansion campaign, because I am more satisfied with the overall plot results--and I actually had more fun. Being involved with Henselt and Dethmold was a bit depressing--I felt like Zoltan did.

I usually only play an RPG one time, so the only reason I did the other path was to get the alternate story perspective, since usually when I go with my gut for RPG decisions I'm more satisfied with the results.

Modifié par YohkoOhno, 11 juin 2011 - 10:46 .

[CalJones]

I'm a terrible repeat player - I can spend months on a game. But for some reason, Witcher games are a two playthrough game each. I think it's because, no matter what choices I make, I'm still always Geralt, where as in, say DA or even ME, I can make a different Warden or Hawke or Shepard - I can be male or female, I can change my face and explore different romances as well as other decisions. Essentially, I'm a new person each time, and the Witcher games, lovely as they are, don't have that.

[Corto81]

Just finished Act 2 with Iorveth (my first playthrough was with Roche).

I absolutely loved it.

90% of it is a different game compared to my first playthrough. New characters, new quests, new areas, different view of the story... Hasn't been done in any RPG I've experienced yet.

The combat is much easier this time around, I've gotten better, and one of the signs in overpowered... But I still get my ass handed to me if I'm not careful, in a second.

Yes, I do miss more customizations and playable companions..
But honestly, best RPG I've played since BG2, only Origins comes remotely close.

[Costin_Razvan]

RageGT wrote...
You're surely do no justice to the Avatar you use here. Arcturus Mengsk would suit you much better!

Arcturus Mengsk commited genocide on a scale that puts Iorveth to look like a small child.

 The whole point is that it's all perspective, for instance you state how else do you expect humans to treat nonhumans when the scoia'tael perform mass murder, but then the scoia'tael perform mass murder BECAUSE of the way humans treat them, the scoia'tael formed BECAUSE of the mistreatment by humans in the first place.  Many humans WOULD commit genocide on the elves, and in fact that is Dethmold's goal and Henselt is helping him.

Where is this said ( that Dethmold ? Bear in mind I haven't played Iorveth's path fully, but I didn't see anything on Roche's path

What my point is that the Scoia'Tel will never achieve anything the way they are doing things, and people will never forget what they did ( It would be like Americans forgiving Bin Laden because he wanted peace after all that he did....you think that's going to work?! )

 The hate is cyclical, that is the point the book is trying to make.  Killing off all the scoia'tael will just cause another faction to form to avenge them when you consider that you have just killed someone's brother/sister/father/daughter/shagbuddy.  It's breaking the cycle that needs to be done, and if you kill off all the scoia'tael as a means to solve that then you would need to kill off all the humans on the other side trying to oppress the elves as well, and that's just going to be one hell of a bloodbath.

I doubt it. The Elves that are not Scoia'Tel pretty much hate them, as long as someone could trully give them rights ( and just kill Iorveth ) then I doubt another faction would form.

  Should Iorveth be held accountable for his murder of innocents?  Yes but then so should all the kings, mercenaries and assorted others you meet in the game.

Again you fail to grasp my point. It's not being accountable, it's about political face: it's about telling humans that you won't tolerate his kind. Even Saskia knows peace won't come with Iorveth as he is.

 Costin - there's also the Stennis factor. He's dead on my Roche playthrough but alive - and king - on my Iorveth playthrough. Despite the fact he comes across as a complete arse, the Act III cutscene describes him as a good and much loved king. I'm not sure how he made such a quick transformation, but there it is. I imagine that would make a difference in any upcoming wars.

A good king, or politician of any sorts, even the most loved ones will always be complete arses. Say what you will about that, but that's reality.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 11 juin 2011 - 12:13 .

[Jan Bartkowicz]

*Minor spoilers ahead*

Well, regarding Aedirn being a very weak country with a small army... that's not entirely true. You have to remember Vergen/Upper Aedirn... is not exactly the heart and soul of true Aedirn. Those territories (geographically "the Pontar Valley") are more like border marches that all the countries around are fighting over. Army gathered under Saskia is, for the most part the peasant rebellion. This is not the real "Aedirn" fighting, Henselt knew that without a king Aedirn wouldn't be able to defend the Pontar Valley... Saskia figured she can stop Henselt, and eventually grant the Pontar Valley independence.

Whoever wins (Henselt, or Saskia) The Pontar Valley never ends up being Aedirn's (either it's Kaedwen's or and Independent Country). That said Aedirn is not done yet. It has a big army, it's capital (Vengenberg) is still strong, and it's army (especially with Stennis crowned) still a force to be reckoned with.

[Costin_Razvan]

I have to ask this: Would Stennis just sit back and allow the Pontar Valley to remain independent? I doubt Aedirn would.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 11 juin 2011 - 01:05 .

[Jan Bartkowicz]

Oh if I would answer that question then that would be more than a spoiler, don't you think?

[Costin_Razvan]

Was worth a shot.

Though could you tell us if we will ever find out about that assassin that Geralt kills at the end of the first game? It's one of the two things that are left unresolved in the plot ( the other being Shanni ).

Anyway, awesome game and I really hope you guys don't cave in to the demands of players who could care less about figuring stuff on their and just want their hand held. It really was great to play a game that doesn't treat you as if you are a kid or a complete idiot.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 11 juin 2011 - 01:21 .

[Jan Bartkowicz]

More than those two things are left unresolved (Boussy's fate etc.)... we sure wish to cover it all in future releases.

As for the game's nature... we do have to work with the feedback we receive. That said, we have to keep are heads cool, and make sure we are "fixing" our game, and not "changing it". We have to admit to our obvious shortcomings in some departments (tutorial, doors system, targeting system etc..).

But in spite of it all the reception around the world is great, and proves you can really make games you would love to play, challenge yourself as a developer (instead of just sticking to some "success formula"), and challenge your players as well. In the end we want an RPG to be a rewarding experience (story and gameplay-wise). Reward you do not work for is not actually a reward after all, is it?

[KnightofPhoenix]

Anathemic wrote...
Ar for Saskia and Pontar holding it's own against Nilfgaard, well that wouldn't happen, considering to reach Pontar you have to go through Lyria, Aedirn, or Temria (if I'm reading the map correctly), so before an assault on Pontar from Nilfgaard could begin, they would already be in conflict with the joint effort of the rest of the Northern Kingdoms.

And don't forget the Pontar has not only the assets of humans, but of dwarves and the Scoia'tael who are undisputably the best archers in the known world.

Temeria will fall easily this time around I think, if Redenia isn't there. If Nilfgaard controls Flotsam, it can blockade the Valley.

But even if Nilgaard is defeated and the North prevails. What's to keep the other Northern Kingdoms from trying to get the Pontar Valley again?

That's what I am questioning. It's ability to survive in the long term. Due to either external threat, or internal strife.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 11 juin 2011 - 02:19 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Anathemic wrote...
So comparing both Ioverth and Roche paths, damn they are very different, I love this game. I agree that Roche's path (somebody in this thread stated before) that you are being tugged mercilessly by the hand of fate. Whereas in Ioverth's path you have more control in what to do (IE saving more).

I really don't see that. I felt Roche's path gave us a lot of control over the geopolitical fate of the North.

@ Cal Jones
I doubt Stennis will accept the break off of his richest province that easily. But if he does, well he's a moron. Buffer zones are not supposed to be very valuable.
Considering the civil war Aedirn just faced, I doubt it too would be able to do much against Nilfgaard.

I personally think that the strongest hope for the North is a Redenian Kaedweni alliance (esp if Redenia controls Temeria, and Kaedwen controls Aedirn). Radovid already has a military build up (as per the trailer).

[YohkoOhno]

Jan Bartkowicz wrote...
As for the game's nature... we do have to work with the feedback we receive. That said, we have to keep are heads cool, and make sure we are "fixing" our game, and not "changing it". We have to admit to our obvious shortcomings in some departments (tutorial, doors system, targeting system etc..).

I did want to thank you for creating a great game.  Despite my criticisms, I did enjoy it.  I'm glad you acknowledge that your tutorial needs work, and it seems you are working on analyzing your flaws and adapting to them.  Since you're planning the XBOX 360 release, and since even though this is a sequel with all the attention its getting, its likely to be several people's introduction to your game--thus, making sure people understand everything is key.  

Experimentation is good--it's how new RPGs are made and how old ones improve.  I think you guys have pushed the envelope with what can be done in cut-scenes, and I think others will be taking some of your improvements to the genre in future games.

[Costin_Razvan]

I wonder why Iorveth and his ilk don't just go to the Valley of Flowers if they really want peace. It is after all an independent state. Perhaps the books only in Polish right now could answer that.

[Bejos_]

Anathemic wrote...

I think the phrase "He who controls the Pontar Valley controls the North" just means whoever dominates it has the upperhand in both economy and as a buffer zone against any of the kingdoms, though I could be wrong.

I was under the impression it had more to do with economy. Valleys typically serve as "bread baskets" for the regions around them, as they're naturally fecund: moister travels downhill, you're spared the worst of winds and frosts and other weather problems, et cetera.
'Course, valleys are also traditionally very susceptible to attack. If you pile enough troops in, you can easily overpower the defending force.

CalJones wrote...
[...] I nailed Ves on one playthrough and the succubus on the other.

I've done three playthroughs and I've yet to meet this succubus. What are you supposed to do to pick up that quest?

[FlintlockJazz]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

I wonder why Iorveth and his ilk don't just go to the Valley of Flowers if they really want peace. It is after all an independent state. Perhaps the books only in Polish right now could answer that.

It's explained in the game: it's a vassal state to Nilfgaard that is primarily occupied by infertile elders who do nothing to upset their masters or to try and increase the elven birth rate from the single digits it currently has.  Iorveth is trying to set up a truly independent state where younger elves can set up and start breeding.

[MDT1]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

I wonder why Iorveth and his ilk don't just go to the Valley of Flowers if they really want peace. It is after all an independent state. Perhaps the books only in Polish right now could answer that.

Isn't it even explained in TW2?

The valley is a puppet of Nilfgaard and Nilfgaard backstabed the squirrels in favour of the northern kings.
They aren't welcome there.

[MDT1]

Bejos_ wrote...

I've done three playthroughs and I've yet to meet this succubus. What are you supposed to do to pick up that quest?

Its from the elf in front of the vergen inn. Probably also on the board.

[FlintlockJazz]

Regarding the independent Pontar State: the best way I see them surviving is by being sneaky bastards. Temeria, Redania, Aedirn and Kaedwen may not want an independent Pontar, but they would want a Pontar under the control of one of their neighbours even less. Saskia and Vergen will probably end up playing the big four against each other in order to survive.