13812 réponses à ce sujet

[Dreadstruck]

slimgrin wrote...
I'm with Iorveth now, an idealist's choice. And Iorveth is such an admirable badass, refreshing for an elf...but Roche. Roche is my ally. I still haven't changed my mind on that.

I really tried doing an Iorveth playthrough for the first time.

Nope, still had to punch that idealistic nutjob into the throat. Very satisfying.

Modifié par Avalla'ch, 05 mai 2012 - 02:08 .

[Sebby]

While Iorveth's an ass hole he's an enjoyable one unlike Yaevinn who's JUST an ass hole.

I was eager to kill him on my first run but had to settle with leaving him to rot at the end of chapter 2.

Modifié par Seboist, 05 mai 2012 - 02:14 .

[xHarrison23]

I must admit, I liked Roche and Iorveth about the same, though I prefer Iorveth's path more then Roche's. Iorveth is just a complete **** for the end of Chapter 1 and beginning of 2, but toward the end of chapter 2 I begin to like and admire him, then by Chapter 3 he felt like a bro. In contrast Roche felt like a bro since the beginning of the game for me.

[KnightofPhoenix]

I personally think Iorveth is a more interesting character.

[Sebby]

I have a feeling we might see Iorveth and Roche working together against the black ones in some capacity in TW3.

[xHarrison23]

Seboist wrote...

I have a feeling we might see Iorveth and Roche working together against the black ones in some capacity in TW3.

That would be nice. I admire Iorveth's cause, not the way he goes about accomplishing it, and I don't admire Roche's cause, but admire the way he goes about accomplishing  it (his loyalty to country) so the two would be a good combination.

[Costin_Razvan]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I personally think Iorveth is a more interesting character.

I disagree, quite strongly. I find him an imbecile up until the point he decided to help Saskia, and he did that because he realized just how dumb his cause was and really it was Letho who came up with the plan to kill Foltest.

And for ******.

He is a good character, but I find Roche just better.

XHarrison23: Roche's cause is to serve his country above everything else. I don't see how that is any less admirable then Iorveth's.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 05 mai 2012 - 02:41 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

A simplistic interpretation to say the least. But I'm too busy atm to go in details, and we've already talked about it before.

[xHarrison23]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

I personally think Iorveth is a more interesting character.

I disagree, quite strongly. I find him an imbecile up until the point he decided to help Saskia, and he did that because he realized just how dumb his cause was and really it was Letho who came up with the plan to kill Foltest.

And for ******.

He is a good character, but I find Roche just better.

XHarrison23: Roche's cause is to serve his country above everything else. I don't see how that is any less admirable then Iorveth's.

Roches motivation is different then his cause, his cause is that of Foltest's, and Fotest's cause is to kill non humans and oppress them. Roche's motivation is to carry out Foltest's cause because of his love for Temeria. Iorveth stand sfor an equal and un oppresive society, a causei can get behind. But killing innocent civilains is not an admirable way to achieve that cause. But then again can you blame him? Is killing innocent elves and driving them to extinction just as bad?

Modifié par xHarrison23, 05 mai 2012 - 02:48 .

[Costin_Razvan]

How is Roche's cause to kill non-humans? It's to kill Scoia'Tel, that's the purpose of his cause. There is no point in the bloody story where Roche at any point indicates any hatred for elves or dwarves, rather just Scoia'Tel, that's different.

The Northen kingdoms may not have treated the elves nicely, but they were NOT commiting genocide. So what the **** are you talking about Foltest?

Instead it's Iorveth who murdered thousands of humans, burned down villages, killed women, children and eldelry just because he hates them.

 
A simplistic interpretation to say the least. But I'm too busy atm to go in details, and we've already talked about it before. 

At this point I am tired of lengthy arguments over something I stopped giving a damn about. Iorveth is just as much a criminal as Loredo is in my eyes, and nothing you say can change that. I don't give a damn for his motivation or reasons just like I don't give a damn for Loredo's.

The only reason I find him in any way redemable is that he realized just how foolish and stupid his initial cause was.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 05 mai 2012 - 02:53 .

[xHarrison23]

Modifié par xHarrison23, 05 mai 2012 - 02:50 .

[Sebby]

Yeah, Iorveth is shown as being more of a bigot than Roche.

[xHarrison23]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

How is Roche's cause to kill non-humans? It's to kill Scoia'Tel, that's the purpose of his cause. There is no point in the bloody story where Roche at any point indicates any hatred for elves or dwarves, rather just Scoia'Tel, that's different.

The Northen kingdoms may not have treated the elves nicely, but they were NOT commiting genocide. So what the **** are you talking about Foltest?

Exactly, Roche isn't killing elves and dwarves because he hates them, but because he is ordered to do so. That is his cause, not his motivation. Like I said above.

And the Northern Kingdoms and other humans are killing elves and dwarves in massive amounts. It is alluded to in the story many times that the Elves are on the verge of extinction. What would you do if you were white and all the blacks started oppressing you and killing you because you were white. You would do the same thing.

[Costin_Razvan]

Where?! Where is it stated that they are committing genocide on the elves? A statement, a journal entry, anything in the regards would be nice. You have nothing to back your claim that Roche kills elves and dwarves outside of the Scoia'Tel and nothing to prove that Foltest was comiting genocide.

Hell the only king you could state that is doing this is Henselt, and that's assuming you actually believe a trailer.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 05 mai 2012 - 02:59 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...


At this point I am tired of lengthy arguments over something I stopped giving a damn about. Iorveth is just as much a criminal as Loredo is in my eyes, and nothing you say can change that. I don't give a damn for his motivation or reasons just like I don't give a damn for Loredo's.

The only reason I find him in any way redemable is that he realized just how foolish and stupid his initial cause was.

It's kind of obvious, yes. Which is too bad, but there are other people who do give a damn that I can discuss things with.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 05 mai 2012 - 02:58 .

[xHarrison23]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Where?! Where is it stated that they are committing genocide on the elves? A statement, a journal entry, anything in the regards would be nice. You have nothing to back your claim that Roche kills elves and dwarves outside of the Scoia'Tel and nothing to prove that Foltest was comiting genocide.

Hell the only king you could state that is doing this is Henselt, and that's assuming you actually believe a trailer.

From the Witcher Wiki:

Today only two enclaves of the race remain: the Blue Mountains, where elves suffer privation and are dying out; and Dol Blathanna, the Valley of the Flowers, which is ruled by the sorceress Enid an Gleanna. The Valley of the Flowers is a dependency of Nifgaard.[/i]

Modifié par xHarrison23, 05 mai 2012 - 03:01 .

[Costin_Razvan]

The Elves in the Blue Mountains refused to even grow or farm their own food. They hid in the mountains even refusing to live among humans and preferring to steal from local farmers.

How does that relate to Roche or your claim of genocide. You are claiming the humans are killing them, again where is this stated? Even after the Scoia'Tel were created there is no instance, perhaps save Kaedwen, of a state deciding to kill every single last one of them. Certainly not Temeria where even if you side with the Order in TW1 the elves and dwarves begin a mass exodus.

 
It's kind of obvious, yes. Which is too bad, but there are other people who do give a damn that I can discuss things with. 

You can talk about him all out want. It doesn't change what he was and what he is. Or I am supposed to find him interesting because he was used by Nilfgaard?

He's badass and awesome in several instances ( Like when he and Geralt talk in Vergen, or with the peasants ) and his VA is good.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 05 mai 2012 - 03:10 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
You can talk about him all out want. It doesn't change what he was and what he is. Or I am supposed to find him interesting because he was used by Nilfgaard?

I am very well aware of what he was and what he is. Dfference is, I find him interesting, you don't.
You're not supposed to do anything, so chill haha

[xHarrison23]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

The Elves in the Blue Mountains refused to even grow or farm their own food. They hid in the mountains even refusing to live among humans and preferring to steal from local farmers.

How does that relate to Roche or your claim of genocide.

 
It's kind of obvious, yes. Which is too bad, but there are other people who do give a damn that I can discuss things with. 

You can talk about him all out want. It doesn't change what he was and what he is.

How is this not? Regardless if the Elves are stupid and don't want to grow thier own food, they live away from humans because of human racism.

When humans are killing them and the elves are dying out, the humans are effectively commiting genocide, whether intentional or not that is a fact.

Scoia'tael kill humans looking for freedom and trying to live.
Humans justifiably kill Scoia'tael (elves) because they kill humans.
Iorveth kills humans because they won't let them live amongst them freely and hence despises him.
Humans don't want to let nonhumans live freely amongst them.
Roche kills Scoia'tael because Temeria is controlled by humans and the Scoia'tael kill humans for freedom.
Roche doesn't kill Scoia'tael because he is racist.

So what don't you understand now?

I am not trying to say Iorveth is better, I am not saying Roche is better. Each side has pros and cons and it is what you believe morally that decides which person isbetter fr you. It is all opinion. 

Modifié par xHarrison23, 05 mai 2012 - 03:16 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Scoia'Tel are not the vast majority of the elven race and even if they were a majority then they would still be to blame for their own demise, not the humans who, God forbid, decided to defend themselves when attacked.

As for "freedom", do you think those peasants and commoners have it under a Medieval Monarchy? Not really. Oh sure the elves are treated worse, but there is no freedom that you talk of.

Again, killing Scoia'Tel is not the same as killing Elves in general. You cannot seem to make the difference. 

The Scoia'Tel kill humans because of their hatred. Iorveth's hatred for humans never goes away, even on his own path when fighting for Upper Aedirn he still hates them. Do you know what he says when you free Saskia from the curse.

"You're the most noble human I met"

Geralt: "I'm not really human."

"Good that you reminded me, my hatred for the species had subsided for a moment."

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 05 mai 2012 - 03:20 .

[xHarrison23]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Scoia'Tel are not the vast majority of the elven race. As for "freedom", do you think those peasants and commoners have it under a Medieval Monarchy? Not really.

Again, killing Scoia'Tel is not the same as killing Elves in general. You cannot seem to make the difference.

i can make the distinction, fighting the Scoia'tael is part of the genocide, and so is the oppression of the elven races that don't join them. Elven races even if left unharmed are refined to places where they can not live and drove them out of thier land. They need to live amongst humans and want to reclaim their homes. Humans won't allow them. Humans are causing them to die. Simple as that.

Modifié par xHarrison23, 05 mai 2012 - 03:22 .

[xHarrison23]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

The Scoia'Tel kill humans because of their hatred.

Because humans hate them and kill and effectively oppress them. It is a two sided dagger.

[Costin_Razvan]

They oppress them, they are not killing their species. Before the crap with the Scoia'Tel began they were living alongside each other with a lot less of the racial hatred around.

But you somehow believe the humans are wrong in defending themselves from the Scoia'Tel, can you please spin more of this bull****?

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 05 mai 2012 - 03:23 .

[xHarrison23]

And though Iorveth hates the human species, he is willing to fight along side them and help establish a united Upper Aerdirn with a mixture of humans and non humans.

[Costin_Razvan]

Iorveth is willing to fight for Saskia, not just for the cause.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 05 mai 2012 - 03:26 .