13812 réponses à ce sujet

[Drizzt ORierdan]

Yeah.. most of the times Empires behave as "imperialists", that just how they roll... lol

But in all seriousness, Sapkowski's vision is not the shallow "Star Wars" image of an Empire. For example, in the past wars that are mentioned in the game, the elves fought on the side of Nilfgaard, on the promise that some land would be granted to them (as reward for their help). And Nilfgaard delivered, and thats how the New Elven kingdom of Dol Blathanna came to be...

Modifié par Drizzt ORierdan, 03 juillet 2011 - 03:21 .

[slimgrin]

What is striking to me is how entitled and impudent all the kings are. All of them. And why is it Foltest can bed his own sister and not ever be called on it?

Modifié par slimgrin, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:12 .

[Costin_Razvan]

He is called on it, quite a few times in fact.

I personally think I would describe Niflgaard as the Third Reich without the whole Genocide thing, slavery of cultures and races that they view as beneath them. While they certainly do look at themselves as superior to other nations, and true imperials are supposedly only those from the heart of the empire they are not extremists or "evil" as I see it.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 03 juillet 2011 - 05:04 .

[Reod]

Doug ****le, the voice of Geralt, Interview

Edit  : his name got censored by BSN 

Modifié par Reod, 03 juillet 2011 - 08:56 .

[Khayness]

Funny, the Nilfgaardian Empire always reminded me of the Persian Empire, since they let subdued monarches to rule the conquered land and wiped out the ones who didn't bow aswell.

But I guess history didn't exist before WWII, folks just love that period way too much.

[WidowMaker9394]

Reod wrote...



Doug ****le, the voice of Geralt, Interview

Edit  : his name got censored by BSN 

Doug ****le is censored?

Heh, I must admit I laughed a bit.

[Luxorek]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Well I just watched an old dev diary of TW2 and something annoyed me.

"Nilfgaard. Totalitarianism. We wanted people to think of the Third Reich. Empire of evil".

Please someone (Luxorek!) tell me that Nilfgaard is not actually portrayed / designed to be that way in the books.

There is no doubt that when Sapkowski created Nilfgaard he was inspired, in some part, by the **** Germany.

Nilfgaard is often described as a dynamic, organised country were everythiiing must be planned first. That's what we would universally call "German qualities" - in the books some people mention that it's thanks to that set of mind that Nilfgaard is so successful.

Nilfgaard differs from the Northern Kingdoms in many areas - there is no religion, people worship the Sun (as the symbol of their country) and the Emperor. I woudn't call Nilgaard totalitarian - it's again wicked humour of Sapkowski, as he makes several characters in the books describe it like that. When you compare Northern Kingdoms to their southern neighbour the latter is definitely "more" civilised. I see here a hint to the historical situation of Europe - kings of the North struggle to mantain power, the must cooperate with the nobles - mainly through privilages and such. There is no such thing in Nilfgaard - emperor holds absolute power, no one can doubt him (make no mistake though, nobles there are not happy with that and planned coups in the past, hell... that's were the Duny's curse comes from). When people of the North call Nilgaard totalitarian they are... you know, hypocritical. To the aristrocracy in, to say, Temeria the lack of power and significance of nobility in Nilfgaard probably looks "totalitarian".

And well... I cannot not to mention the fact that during the war with Nilfgaard, one of the main points of Northern propaganda was that the Empire is umm... looking for the "living space". Look it up, if you don't know what Lebensraum is...

Oh... and during the war the army of Nilfgaard was divided into three groups, that were supposed to achieve different goals. They were called.... wait, dramatic music...  Army Group North, Army Group Center and Army Group West. Check "Operation Barbarossa" if that doesn't sound familiar...

EDIT: N.a.z.i. was censored... how ridiculous...

Modifié par Luxorek, 03 juillet 2011 - 01:09 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Thanks Luxorek. I don't mind it sharing elements with the Third Reich. However so long as it's done realistically and objectively. The National Socialist agenda / beliefs make sense when the context of the time is taken into account.

I've studied the subject quite a bit, so I don't mind comparisons (which I assume was at least partially used by Sapkowski for shock value), so long as the comparison is not used to vilify Nilfgaard. As in make them fantasy n@zis with no depth to them, with devs just expecting us to hate and kill them.

[slimgrin]

Luxorek is our lore master.

[Drizzt ORierdan]

Great interview... Nice finding, Reod. 

Modifié par Drizzt ORierdan, 03 juillet 2011 - 04:17 .

[Archaven]

Reod wrote...



Doug ****le, the voice of Geralt, Interview

Edit  : his name got censored by BSN 

Nice find Reod.. Not sure if anyone likes the earlier voice of Iorwerth.. it has more power and leadership to his tone and suits the character very well. Not sure why they scrap it off.

[dzizass]

Luxorek wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Well I just watched an old dev diary of TW2 and something annoyed me.

"Nilfgaard. Totalitarianism. We wanted people to think of the Third Reich. Empire of evil".

Please someone (Luxorek!) tell me that Nilfgaard is not actually portrayed / designed to be that way in the books.

There is no doubt that when Sapkowski created Nilfgaard he was inspired, in some part, by the **** Germany.

Nilfgaard is often described as a dynamic, organised country were everythiiing must be planned first. That's what we would universally call "German qualities" - in the books some people mention that it's thanks to that set of mind that Nilfgaard is so successful.

Nilfgaard differs from the Northern Kingdoms in many areas - there is no religion, people worship the Sun (as the symbol of their country) and the Emperor. I woudn't call Nilgaard totalitarian - it's again wicked humour of Sapkowski, as he makes several characters in the books describe it like that. When you compare Northern Kingdoms to their southern neighbour the latter is definitely "more" civilised. I see here a hint to the historical situation of Europe - kings of the North struggle to mantain power, the must cooperate with the nobles - mainly through privilages and such. There is no such thing in Nilfgaard - emperor holds absolute power, no one can doubt him (make no mistake though, nobles there are not happy with that and planned coups in the past, hell... that's were the Duny's curse comes from). When people of the North call Nilgaard totalitarian they are... you know, hypocritical. To the aristrocracy in, to say, Temeria the lack of power and significance of nobility in Nilfgaard probably looks "totalitarian".

And well... I cannot not to mention the fact that during the war with Nilfgaard, one of the main points of Northern propaganda was that the Empire is umm... looking for the "living space". Look it up, if you don't know what Lebensraum is...

Oh... and during the war the army of Nilfgaard was divided into three groups, that were supposed to achieve different goals. They were called.... wait, dramatic music...  Army Group North, Army Group Center and Army Group West. Check "Operation Barbarossa" if that doesn't sound familiar...

EDIT: N.a.z.i. was censored... how ridiculous...

When describing Nilfgaard Sapkowski made also references to ancient Rome and the USSR.

[Monica83]

i hated henselt a nice character but very evil one

[KnightofPhoenix]

Monica83 wrote...

i hated henselt a nice character but very evil one

I didn't think he was evil. He was certainly an a-hole, but thanks to him (and Dethmold), Kaedwen could potentialy reach its zenith.

Now I wish Henselt's domestic policies in regards to nonhumans was explored more. The Witcher World trailer seemed to imply that Henselt is almost trying to exterminate them. But the game contradicts this as we do see dwarves in Henselt's camp.

So I am thinking that Henselt is very hard on nonhumans, but is not genocidal.

[slimgrin]

Henselt thought his position safeguarded him from judgement or retribution, right up to the end. A typical pompous king. Luckily, Roche had something to say about that.

And some karma hit me hard today. Last weak I teased a console gamer when she lost all her ME files. I said something about being able to back them up, were she on pc. I just lost my entire second playthrough while cleaning out save files. And they weren't backed up.

[Joshd21]

Here is what I am confused about, in the end no matter what road you pick.  The other mage. If you save the mage by switching out the diamond before she explodes, she mentions Yennefer is in the next town over.

Then Letho mentions Yennefer saying she is with the imperial army.When you have the final talk with him at the end of the game.

I looked her up here. http://witcher.wikia.com/wiki/Yennefer

It appears before Triss Merigold he was in love once and how likely is this to carry on in Witcher 3?

Witcher saga have a habit of dropping little things in part 1, that did not make sense untill part 2. Anyone think that on part 3, they are already setting up the storyline? Because I never once encounterd Yennifer during my travels.

Yennefer appears in flashbacks in The Witcher 2. Where is she mentioned, click on this youtube clip to hear her mentioned.:


Summary:

So she is mentioned at the very start of Witcher 2, and he claimed some people took her. Then she is brought up again at the end, letho claims she is STILL alive and with the people that took her. However you are not given an option to go "after her" which leads me to believe they are saving this for Witcher 3

[KnightofPhoenix]

Yes they most probably are. I am thinking that the Wild Hunt and Ciri are also saved for TW3.

[Joshd21]

I think the above posted is true. They have yet to say how he is able to "fulley recover" his memory. He does remember a great deal after the fog is lifted but not everything. So I think this new imperial army might be where the saga ends. He clearly has detailed them as demons and what now.

Even though it might be a year before its released it's nice to know, I have another game to look foward to. My only regret in the playthrough is not killing that cocky prince with the locals.

Also I am posting below. What I found out after I googled "Yennifer" I did this because I kept hearing her name mentioned in game. I thought at the very end, I was missing a quest or something. But after I googled the name and discovered most likely she is in the Witcher 3.

I found this which is equally as interesting, they make a strong habit of bringing her up but not talking to her directly. I hope Triss Merigold stays for Witcher 3

While she never appears, nor is directly mentioned, the creators of the game did "sneak in" numerous references to Yennefer.

[list][*] In the Inn in the Outskirts of Vizima, Geralt can talk to a bard, who tells him about Dandelion, and about the ballads of the White Wolf Dandelion's sung. Among them the tale of how "Geralt married a sorceress and they live somewhere on the happy isles".
[*]
[*] At the very beginning of Chapter III, Triss tells Geralt that "the last time (she) felt this way, (Geralt) and a sorceress were playing with a genie".
[*]
[*] In Chapter IV, the innkeeper of the Country Inn at Murky Waters can tell a tale about Ciri. Near the end of it, he says that the sorceress the witcher loved tried to revive him, but died in the process.
[*]
[*] If Geralt chose Triss as Alvin's guardian in Chapter III, and if he answers king Foltest when questioned about their relationship that he really loves Triss, the update on the Identity-quest says, among other things: "My amnesia prevents me from emembering our relations in the past, but I have the impression I once loved a sorceress, deeply..."

Modifié par Joshd21, 04 juillet 2011 - 09:47 .

[slimgrin]

The problem is Yennefer is the fan favorite for those who have read all the books. For me, an English speaker, I don't get that luxury. I've read one, and I think Yennefer is nothing more than a selfish tease in 'The Last Wish'. I rather hated her. But I like Triss, and I have many in-game reason for doing so. Many over at the CDPR site thought Triss was an effing traitor, and yet in TW2, she says she's prepared to drop everything for Geralt, just like she said in TW1, the second time we've heard that from her.

If they really want to introduce Yennefer in TW3, good luck. It won't be easy.

Modifié par slimgrin, 04 juillet 2011 - 10:02 .

[Joshd21]

Spoilers, things in Witcher 2 I did not know had a huge impact.

1. Help Roche or Don't (Where you fight Letho, I believe in middle of chapter 2) You are given a choice to give the rebel his sword or not. If you do not, he is captured and you help Roche with his quest. If he is allowed to live, then nearly the entire town is in utter choas but his story is more interesting.

2. I could have saved the dragon- At the very end, I wasn't aware that I could have saved the Dragon by casting that dagger over her. I always felt sad to kill that dragon.

 Their are alot of minor differences but biggest choice so far seems to be, helping the rebel or rouche. It details the rest of your adventure depending on what side you are on.

What I'd like in W3:

Triss Merrigold (I haven't read the books) but she never seems to get old. Maybe it's because they did a make over on her but she seems loyal to him. While she openly admits she had other men that wanted to marry her.

More of the same, when a button flashes on screen in critcal moments in the game. You should be tested on your speed and you are defeated if you are not quick enough.

I can't really detail what I would want. They already gave us "everything' bioware said "no" to. I am talking about the vulgar storyline not just the sex, how they talk to each other like older people rather then like kids.

Interesting detailed people and adventures you can be on. And a wide range of choices.

[Cyberfrog81]

Joshd21 wrote...

1. Help Roche or Don't (Where you fight Letho, I believe in middle of chapter 2) You are given a choice to give the rebel his sword or not. If you do not, he is captured and you help Roche with his quest. If he is allowed to live, then nearly the entire town is in utter choas but his story is more interesting.

It's not the "give sword or knock down" decision that decides the main path, but who you agree to help after you've found Cedric. (Though I should note that I haven't tested how friendly the Scoia'tael are after you help get Iorveth captured. Roche is pissed if you give Iorveth the sword, but forgives you.)

And Iorveth can make an appearance in Ch2 on Roche's path... he's not killed in Ch1.

Modifié par Cyberfrog81, 04 juillet 2011 - 11:11 .

[Nerevar-as]

slimgrin wrote...

The problem is Yennefer is the fan favorite for those who have read all the books. For me, an English speaker, I don't get that luxury. I've read one, and I think Yennefer is nothing more than a selfish tease in 'The Last Wish'. I rather hated her. But I like Triss, and I have many in-game reason for doing so. Many over at the CDPR site thought Triss was an effing traitor, and yet in TW2, she says she's prepared to drop everything for Geralt, just like she said in TW1, the second time we've heard that from her.

If they really want to introduce Yennefer in TW3, good luck. It won't be easy.

Yet Yennefer was the one who drained her lifeforce trying to save Geralt. The only person more important to her than him is Ciri. She becomes more likeable from Blood of Elves on. in the second book of tales she hits really low however (Shards of Ice?).

About how esay it will be, again this game was made for and by fans in first place, and makes it much more enjoyable. It won´t be more difficult than introducing Triss in TW1.

Modifié par Nerevar-as, 04 juillet 2011 - 10:46 .

[Joshd21]

Cyberfrog81 wrote...

Joshd21 wrote...

1. Help Roche or Don't (Where you fight Letho, I believe in middle of chapter 2) You are given a choice to give the rebel his sword or not. If you do not, he is captured and you help Roche with his quest. If he is allowed to live, then nearly the entire town is in utter choas but his story is more interesting.

It's not the "give sword or knock down" decision that decides the main path, but who you agree to help after you've found Cedric.

And Iorveth can make an appearance in Ch2 on Roche's path... he's not killed in Ch1.

I never said Iorveth was killed in captured one. I used the term "captured" let me ask you a question. While it may be possible to steer Iorventh from being captured by hanging him the sword. (After that you can decide who to help) I never tried not giving him the sword, then trying to bust him out of being captured.

I say his story is more interesting, with that I mean Iorventh because as soon as you get back into town if you helped him. Their are people murdered. (I'm not sure, if you let him go. If you can still go to Roche) those NPC's who died, it looks like the end for them regardless of who you help, once you enter back into town.

Like I said, I never tried letting "Inorveth" go only to re-capture him. As soon as I entered back into town and people were murdered, I assumed that choice was stuck. Regardless I find his story with Dragon Lady, and the fights more interesting. I am simply bored now everytime I play the Henselt storyline.

Back on topic:

I have not read the books. Yet they keep hinting at Yennefer, at first (At the start of the game) and then once again at the (end of the game) those are pretty strong hints. Why hint at someone if you are not going to even come across them next game?

I'm not sure. I do know that the company has pretty much told bioware to eat the dust. They are going everywhere, Bioware normally wouldn't in their moral story storylines. However I have not a single complaint about it, the game is not centered around "sex" as some suggests. It's more of being treated, talked to like an adult rather then a guy who has sex with their clothes on (Cough DA2)

I do know that the imperial thing sounds like a great new foe in the upcoming series. I do hope Triss is along for the ride.

Modifié par Joshd21, 04 juillet 2011 - 10:50 .

[blothulfur]

I imagine Geralt's a sucker for bad women, I always thought he was transferring his feelings on to Triss from the first scene in the courtyard of Kaer Morhen and with all the later hints cropping up in game and I wouldn't be surprised if an infatuation with Yennefer is unavoidable in the next game.

Bloody hell imagine if the white flame dancing on the graves of his foes has a new favourite consort in the witcher 3 and she's a raven haired sorceress. Now that would be a showdown but Yennefer would need a really good voice actress.

[slimgrin]

Nerevar-as wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

The problem is Yennefer is the fan favorite for those who have read all the books. For me, an English speaker, I don't get that luxury. I've read one, and I think Yennefer is nothing more than a selfish tease in 'The Last Wish'. I rather hated her. But I like Triss, and I have many in-game reason for doing so. Many over at the CDPR site thought Triss was an effing traitor, and yet in TW2, she says she's prepared to drop everything for Geralt, just like she said in TW1, the second time we've heard that from her.

If they really want to introduce Yennefer in TW3, good luck. It won't be easy.

Yet Yennefer was the one who drained her lifeforce trying to save Geralt. The only person more important to her than him is Ciri. She becomes more likeable from Blood of Elves on. in the second book of tales she hits really low however (Shards of Ice?).

About how esay it will be, again this game was made for and by fans in first place, and makes it much more enjoyable. It won´t be more difficult than introducing Triss in TW1.

They can't do that though. The next game might very well beat the next book translation. They need to keep the game's lore separate from Sapkowski's. It's what they have done so far.

Modifié par slimgrin, 04 juillet 2011 - 10:59 .