13812 réponses à ce sujet

[horacethegrey]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
As for your other argument that Geralt doesn't care about certain things. I'll put this as bluntly as I can: STFU. Geralt cares about what you as the player care about. If you want to save Triss because you care about her you can do that, if you want to save her because you want to get the information she then that's up to you. If you want to help Roche because you care about Temeria, or him, or want to get vengenace on Dethmold, or cared about Foltest and want to save his bastard daughter then it's up to you. If you want to kill Letho because of the things he did, or because you deem him too dangerous to let live, or because you want vengeance.

If you want to spare him you can do so because he was your friend and protected Yennfer, because killing him is pointless, because Witcher's killing fellow witchers is foolish. Etc. I can go on.

The bloody point is that Geralt, despite the fact he is a set character, has complex motivation that vary depending on each individual player. So don't ****ing reduce him to a simple character who only cares about a few things.

As Geralt stated to Kimbolt: "I decide what I care about." 

Wow. You're taking this rather personally aren't you? And I thought we we're having a civil conversation. regarding the plot and intricacies of this splendid game, but you choose to take offense when my thinking doesn't agree with yours. 

Tell you what, I'll ignore your rudeness and let bygones be bygones. Take a chill pill dude.

[Costin_Razvan]

Way to miss the entire point.

[horacethegrey]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

Way to miss the entire point.

I did read the entire post. And I do agree with your point that Geralt's actions are determined by the player. 

But telling me to- What was it? Oh yeah, STFU. That I take issue with. 

Dude, we were having a civil discussion and you choose lose to your cool. As I said, take a chill pill.

Modifié par horacethegrey, 21 mai 2012 - 02:07 .

[Costin_Razvan]

I take a big issue with anyone saying Geralt only cares about certain things, which is what exactly you did in the post I made the reply for.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 21 mai 2012 - 02:11 .

[horacethegrey]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

And I take a big issue with anyone saying Geralt only cares about certain things.

And that's my interpretation of the character. You don't agree with me? Fine. But don't take it personally.

[Costin_Razvan]

It's one thing to say that YOUR Geralt only cares about certain things, but don't state it in a general sense as if all Geralts only care about certain things. My Geralt doesn't care for Triss that much, nor does he care for the Scoia'Tael cause or Iorveth, or killing Henselt for what he did, but he's my Geralt,

I don't expect all players to play their Geralt's in a certain way. I do argue with them over their decisions, but that's a different subject. If someone wants to kill Henselt then do so, but present a good argument as to why you do it if you are arguing about it at all. If you don't, then you don't.

It's like using the argument that Geralt should side with a certain faction in TW1, because of how he was in the past: He doesn't. He can side with either of them or stay neutral just fine and it makes perfect sense regardless of what you pick, since your Geralt cares about certain things.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 21 mai 2012 - 02:18 .

[horacethegrey]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

It's one thing to say that YOUR Geralt only cares about certain things, but don't state it in a general sense as if all Geralts only care about certain things.

And when did I ever say that? I only gave you my interpretation of the character, you chose to take offense. 

You can disagree with me all you want. But don't take it personally dude.

[horacethegrey]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
I don't expect all players to play their Geralt's in a certain way. I do argue with them over their decisions, but that's a different subject. If someone wants to kill Henselt then do so, but present a good argument as to why you do it if you are arguing about it at all. If you don't, then you don't.

I'll gladly argue with my reasons why I played the game the way I did. But I ask you, don't resort to insults or rudeness when we do. Otherwise we'll have a flame war.

[Costin_Razvan]

When did I ever give the impression of caring if a flame war starts or not? I am rude and I insult people and anyone who does should certainly expect it in return. If there is one thing I am tired about is being nice to people you would sooner shout at.

As for taking it personally. In Story driven RPGs we put a part of ourselves in the characters we play, so obviously in a good one you come to care for the character you've built quite a lot and an important part of the character is perspective on things. So yes I take it personally when someone states Geralt only cares about certain things.

People shout praise at TW2 for choice and consequence, but there's another thing as important at these two: Perspective. Perspective on characters, perspective on choices and the consequences, perspective on the world around you.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 21 mai 2012 - 02:33 .

[horacethegrey]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

When did I ever give the impression of caring if a flame war starts or not? I am rude and I insult people and anyone who does should certainly expect it in return. If there is one thing I am tired about is being nice to people you would sooner shout at.

And when did an argument have to resort to insults to get a point across? Dude seriously, take a chill pill.

[horacethegrey]

Costin_Razvan wrote...
As for taking it personally. In Story driven RPGs we put a part of ourselves in the characters we play, so obviously in a good one you come to care for the character you've built quite a lot and an important part of the character is perspective on things. So yes I take it personally when someone states Geralt only cares about certain things.

Dude. You can feel passionate about it all you want, but don't lash out at people just cause they don't agree with you.

Modifié par horacethegrey, 21 mai 2012 - 02:37 .

[Tirigon]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

 My Geralt doesn't care for Triss that much

Which is sadly out of character, because CDPR decided starting the game with Geralt and Triss being lovers would be a jolly good idea (it was r*tarded, as it takes away choices).

Modifié par Tirigon, 21 mai 2012 - 02:55 .

[mupp3tz]

Speaking of which, I wonder if we will ever actually get to see Yennefer in game?

[Costin_Razvan]

horacethegrey: I simply don't care.

Tirigon: At least they gave us a journal entry if you romance Shani explaining it, and you can play Geralt as just a **** buddy, or a friend with benefits. So there is room to RP there.

Triss btw is a Geralt fangirl. 

M U P P 3 T Z: I don't see how they could make TW3 without Yennfer? I mean what would Geralt do? Stay in the north and unite it against Nilfgaard? I certainly hope CDPR doesn't follow that idiotic path in TW3. Geralt's not a general, a ruler nor a leader in any sense they shouldn't try and make him one.

I know he made a fellowship of sorts to rescue Ciri, but a small band is hardly compared to leading several nations in a war. Mind you I wouldn't be bothered by it IF CDPR made a game where the main plot was about creating an army, forging political alliance and such but Geralt is not suited to that even though he knows his ways around politics.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 21 mai 2012 - 03:04 .

[horacethegrey]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

horacethegrey: I simply don't care.

Judging from your posts, you seem to care a lot.

[Costin_Razvan]

Obviously I care for the game. I don't care if people have a problem with my harsh words.

[horacethegrey]

Fine. I guess we'll leave it at that.

[Addai]

Costin_Razvan wrote...

The peasants aren't the ones with armies at their backs, nor do they control the economy of the realm. Also based on what are you claiming Stennis will be manipulated by the nobles.

As for Radovid and Henselt, you know very well that in politics you can smile, hug someone warmly, treat them as a friend and then butcher their entire family.

Peasants do control the economy, to an extent.  Stennis should have gotten a lesson in the danger of not having the peasants behind you (or, in Saskia's case, the benefit to having their support) but of course he'll never learn.  I could see deciding to kill Saskia because you're afraid Philippa will use her to deep fry a few hundred more people, but killing a noble-hearted golden dragon in order to bequeath the world a King Stennis... that's a real tragicomic story you've got going there.

I don't mean that Radovid and Henselt are bosom buddies- just that it disgusted me to see them both so jolly over carving up Temeria.

[mupp3tz]

I hope we do see Yen in TW3 as a character we can interact with, and not just something alluded to in cutscenes. I feel like she is the colloquial carrot at the end of the stick that is just perpetually barely within grasp. Hopefully, CDPR won't turn TW3 into a mock Mario & Peach story -- i.e. "Yennefer is in this city." > *Geralt hacks his way there* > "Oh.. I guess she left? Look for clues!" or "HAHA! A trap!"

I don't think they would do that. CDPR is much better than that... but, one can't help but worry. Or perhaps TW3 may just revolve around the warring fractions, with some influence on Geralt's past, and the end may be Geralt going off to finally find Yennefer.

[Costin_Razvan]

but killing a noble-hearted golden dragon in order to bequeath the world a King Stennis... that's a real tragicomic story you've got going there.

To be clear. I didn't kill her because I like Stennis or think he will make a good king. I am frankly indifferent to him. I killed because as I see it in the war, in any war for that matter, division will destroy you and division is exactly what you will get between Upper Aedirn if led by Saskia and the other northen realms. With her dead Aedirn will likely retake Vergen in weeks, since I doubt that the state there will survive without Saskia. As I see it the North is better off without her in the war with Nilfgaard.

Or if it does survive without her, then well all the more bloody reason to kill her and allow a proper leader to take her place who won't ****** EVERY single ruler in the North. Saskia is a good figurehead but I do not want her leading a state. I do spare her on Roche's path though since at that point she is no longer in a position to **** things over.

The Pontar Valley is the most important piece of land in the East. From there you have the only route that can allow you to outflank Temeria. Henselt's deal with Nilfgaard was the thing that stopped the entire Eastern Army from doing exactly that in the last war. One shouldn't take chances with it.

The peasants on their own don't control anything. They are not irrelevant but neither are they that important.

As for Radovid and Henselt, well what do you expect? That's kinda what you do in politics with someone who became your ally. You act nicely to each other publicly even if you hate each other.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 21 mai 2012 - 03:34 .

[Kris69]

If we don't get to see Yen in TW3 I'm going to drive all the way to hated Warsaw and storm their HQ...

[Costin_Razvan]

One thing I am curios about is how they are going to make the romance work...I do think she is going to be introduced mid game at least.

[mupp3tz]

I'm also curious about the romance. I think if your only exposure to the Witcher world is the video game, Triss will most likely be what you consider "right". If you have read some of the books and understand Geralt and Yen's relationship, then that is what makes sense. Of course.. this doesn't factor in personal preference... but I feel the game is skewed towards Triss as LI. 

It'll be difficult to handle, and I'm really interested to see what happens with Yennefer and how they will style the character.

Modifié par M U P P 3 T Z, 21 mai 2012 - 03:40 .

[Costin_Razvan]

Truth be told I am more interested in Cynthia then I am in Triss or Yennefer at this stage. I really hope I have the option of not engaging in any romance with either Triss or Yennefer.

Modifié par Costin_Razvan, 21 mai 2012 - 03:41 .

[mupp3tz]

I'm also a big Cynthia fan. :]

When I initially got into the Witcher games (started there before reading the books), I was all for Geralt + Triss. But then, when I started reading the books... I kind of started losing respect for her. She is so desperate for Geralt to love her that I feel like choosing her is kind of a pity decision. Yennefer... not too sure, to be honest. I feel like she's overdramatic and stubborn.. but then again, I've only read Last Wish and Sword of Destiny. And, I favor her more in the sense that I find characters like Philippa amusing.

Cynthia, on the other hand, is a bad ass.