162 réponses à ce sujet

[Spectre Impersonator]

Triss is a damsel the whole game, Phillipa gets locked up, tortured, and needs to be rescued by Geralt, Baroness LaValette is tortured (naked) and needs to be rescued by Geralt, Sabrina is burned alive on a wheel, Saskia does the whole sleeping beauty routine and needs to be cured by Geralt, Vess is raped and needs to be saved by Geralt, etc...and all of them are wearing sexy clothing. The game portrays them as damsels and objects of desire. No thanks.  

Can understand why a lot of people wouldn't like it, but that appeals to me. Playing the hero, protector, savior, etc.

[Hanako Ikezawa]

I'm hoping Cyberpunk 2077 has a Character Creator. I'm a sucker for Cyberpunk genre(especially the Dues Ex and Ghost in the Shell franchises) so if it has a CC, I may actually buy a CDPR game. 

[Eshaye]

Never played The Witcher. Don't care about the Witcher and there's a good chance I'll never play The Witcher. So yeah..... *shrug* *Moves along* 

[Nefla]

Can understand why a lot of people wouldn't like it, but that appeals to me. Playing the hero, protector, savior, etc.

I assume you're a guy? If so then it only makes sense that you would like playing that role in that game. The male gender is treated as varied, heroic, saviors, protectors, etc...my gender is treated as generally helpless objects who's only "power" is their sex appeal. That's not something I can identify with. If there were some sex object damsel women and some normal looking, practical women who could actually defend themselves and stand on their own two feet and stand toe to toe with the male characters then it would be fine. Variety is great after all, but that wasn't the case. 

[GenericEnemy]

I'm a woman, and I've never once felt offended by anything in the Witcher. 

[Dr. Rush]

It is so weird how the DA and TW communities always feel like they are in some form of competition with each other. It is bizarre tribal-customer behavior. They are not mutually exclusive and they never will be.

[Gtdef]

Funny but the last thing I got of Geralt is the hero/savior kind of thing. It's his uncertainty and trying to find his place in the world that make me relate to him. Does his past and the opinions that people have about him matter?

 

There aren't many games that create this environment.

 

As for his looks, I find him pleasant to look at. Better than anything I could do with some character creators tbh. Only heavily modded Skyrim comes close ^^

[Revan Reborn]

Yeah, this is one of those 'excuses' to make women attractive that frequently come up and just because the novels did it too doesn't make it any less...tiresome. Women being 'powerful' because men find them attractive is a very worn-out trope in my opinion.

I'm not saying whether it's right or wrong. The books just depict a very imperfect world and sorceresses use whatever edge they can to get ahead. I'm just merely explaining why they are generally very attractive. Not every female in TW2 was as sexually appealing as Triss or Ves, but then again most of those weren't major characters either.

 

Triss is a damsel the whole game, Phillipa gets locked up, tortured, and needs to be rescued by Geralt, Baroness LaValette is tortured (naked) and needs to be rescued by Geralt, Sabrina is burned alive on a wheel, Saskia does the whole sleeping beauty routine and needs to be cured by Geralt, Vess is raped and needs to be saved by Geralt, etc...and all of them are wearing sexy clothing. The game portrays them as damsels and objects of desire. No thanks.  

Triss is really only out of the game for the second act, being a third of the experience. Phillipa is far from a damsel as she calls upon a dragon to ravage and destroy everybody in the third act. While the Baroness was topless, so was her son if you decided not to kill him in the same exact scenario. Sabrina massacred an entire battlefield because of her choices and hardly was innocent. Saskia potentially smacks around King Henselt, depending on who you side with.

 

Ves was Roche's strongest and most reliable solider and only found her match to be that of Geralt. The tragedy that ensued with Henselt was more to show how much of a scum bag he actually was. When someone says "sexy clothing," I envision lingerie. All of the characters are far from being naked. They are fully clothed, albeit perhaps stylish. My point is that TW2 depicts everything in multiple ways depending on your choices. You gave a largely skewed perception based on what was likely your only playthrough.

[pengwin21]

I'm less offended than just...uninterested?

 

Take the Witcher 3 'Killing Monsters' trailer. Geralt rescues some young female (who is presumably innocent of her crimes for...some unexplained reason) from a group of brutish guards. It didn't strike me as 'gritty, grey realism', more like 'Superman rescues Lois Lane from some thugs.' There's nothing necessarily wrong with superheroes rescuing damsels, but it seems like the Witcher isn't being honest about what it really is a lot of the time.

[-TC1989-]

I will say that I give an edge to Dragon Age... because of Bioware. I say Bioware because I have a much longer history with them than I do with CDPR. My first game with CDPR was The Witcher 2, which was just great. If I had a couple titles to add on their list, I might have a different answer. But for me personally, a good chunk of my excitement with games is who is making it. Now like a lot people, Bioware is walking on thin ice, but I have faith in them. Buuuttt.... if DA: I is disappointing, and The Witcher 3 is as good as I'm hoping... then I don't know what to tell you.

[GenericEnemy]

 

I'm less offended than just...uninterested?

 

Take the Witcher 3 'Killing Monsters' trailer. Geralt rescues some young female (who is presumably innocent of her crimes for...some unexplained reason) from a group of brutish guards. It didn't strike me as 'gritty, grey realism', more like 'Superman rescues Lois Lane from some thugs.' There's nothing necessarily wrong with superheroes rescuing damsels, but it seems like the Witcher isn't being honest about what it really is a lot of the time.

 

If that was some completely innocent looking dude those soldiers were abusing, Geralt probably would have saved him there too. That's just Geralt, and was pretty similar to his depiction in the books given the fact that the main quote in the trailer is right from them.

 

We have no idea if that woman was innocent or not, it was the way they were treating her which caused him to intervene. He didn't even talk to her afterwards, he just killed them all and walked off. 

 

[Darkly Tranquil]

We have no idea if that woman was innocent or not, it was the way they were treating her which caused him to intervene. He didn't even talk to her afterwards, he just killed them all and walked off.

He didn't kill the last one. He left him standing with his neck in the noose, leaving his fate up to the woman.

But I agree with your point, he kills them not because the woman might be innocent, but because they were being sadistic. He was, as he say, "Killing monsters".

[pengwin21]

 

 

 

If that was some completely innocent looking dude those soldiers were abusing, Geralt probably would have saved him there too. That's just Geralt, and was pretty similar to his depiction in the books given the fact that the main quote in the trailer is right from them.

 

We have no idea if that woman was innocent or not, it was the way they were treating her which caused him to intervene. He didn't even talk to her afterwards, he just killed them all and walked off. 

 

 

And yet they chose to go with "young, attractive female" and the only depiction of women in the admittedly short trailer is 'helpless damsel'.

 

This probably appeals to people who enjoy the "heroic savior/protector etc." stuff and there's nothing wrong with that, but some people are not on board with the male power fantasy. I don't find male power fantasies to be in line with the 'mature, gritty realism' the Witcher supposedly has.

[Revan Reborn]

I'm less offended than just...uninterested?

 

Take the Witcher 3 'Killing Monsters' trailer. Geralt rescues some young female (who is presumably innocent of her crimes for...some unexplained reason) from a group of brutish guards. It didn't strike me as 'gritty, grey realism', more like 'Superman rescues Lois Lane from some thugs.' There's nothing necessarily wrong with superheroes rescuing damsels, but it seems like the Witcher isn't being honest about what it really is a lot of the time.

With all due respect, I believe you missed the point of the trailer then. This wasn't a matter of what was "right" or "wrong." Regardless of whether the women was innocent or not, what Geralt saw was cruel and monstrous in nature. As others have suggested, it could have been anyone. Geralt will come to the defense of anyone, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. He himself has been discriminated against and is seen as an outsider. He merely can sympathize with those who lack the power to defend themselves.

 

He didn't kill the last one. He left him standing with his neck in the noose, leaving his fate up to the woman.

But I agree with your point, he kills them not because the woman might be innocent, but because they were being sadistic. He was, as he say, "Killing monsters".

Exactly. Geralt is first and foremost a Witcher, a monster slayer. Regardless of who it is and what is happening, Geralt will do what he does best.

[Revan Reborn]

And yet they chose to go with "young, attractive female" and the only depiction of women in the admittedly short trailer is 'helpless damsel'.

 

This probably appeals to people who enjoy the "heroic savior/protector etc." stuff and there's nothing wrong with that, but some people are not on board with the male power fantasy. I don't find male power fantasies to be in line with the 'mature, gritty realism' the Witcher supposedly has.

I'm hopeful that Yennefer and Ciri will have some major moments in TW3 as they are incredible characters in the books and are far from damsels in distress. Ciri, herself, is more or less the female version of Geralt. She can take care of herself and she is always getting into trouble.

[pengwin21]

With all due respect, I believe you missed the point of the trailer then. This wasn't a matter of what was "right" or "wrong." Regardless of whether the women was innocent or not, what Geralt saw was cruel and monstrous in nature. As others have suggested, it could have been anyone. Geralt will come to the defense of anyone, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. He himself has been discriminated against and is seen as an outsider. He merely can sympathize with those who lack the power to defend themselves.

 

 

Protecting the innocent who can't defend themselves against cruel and monstrous behavior isn't very morally ambiguous- that's what Superman does. The trailer is trying to go into philosophies about shades of grey, but seems to miss the point entirely.

[Schmonozov]

Oh god, mods please lock this thread already.

[GenericEnemy]

Protecting the innocent who can't defend themselves against cruel and monstrous behavior isn't very morally ambiguous- that's what Superman does. The trailer is trying to go into philosophies about shades of grey, but seems to miss the point entirely.

 

Superman doesn't brutally murder people in defense of someone who could actually be a murderous cannibal as her sentence read. What Geralt saw was a pretty grey situation - on one hand, this woman's sentence could be completely justified. He doesn't know that. On the other, the soldiers were completely sadistic and reveling in it far too much. 

 

He chose to kill them. 

 

It really can't be compared to saving a schoolbus full of children from a supervillain. 

[Gtdef]

Protecting the innocent who can't defend themselves against cruel and monstrous behavior isn't very morally ambiguous- that's what Superman does. The trailer is trying to go into philosophies about shades of grey, but seems to miss the point entirely.

 

Geralt is not superman, he is the witcher. His moral dilemma is using his skills to kill people or reserving them only for monsters. He doesn't identify these thugs as monsters as a normal person would.

 

This is one of the two major character developments point of the character. The other is the existential matter. He isn't sure if he should identify as a human or a non human. The world thinks of him as a non human at best, or an unholy murdering monster at worst unless they want to ask a favor.

[Revan Reborn]

Superman doesn't brutally murder people in defense of someone who could actually be a murderous cannibal as her sentence read. What Geralt saw was a pretty grey situation - on one hand, this woman's sentence could be completely justified. He doesn't know that. On the other, the soldiers were completely sadistic and reveling in it far too much. 

 

He chose to kill them. 

 

It really can't be compared to saving a schoolbus full of children from a supervillain. 

Exactly. The larger point we should really be focused on are the consequences of Geralt's actions. If she actually was a cannibal, then many more will potentially die and suffer because of Geralt's actions. There really isn't a "right" or "wrong" in the Witcher games. You just merely have choices with consequences. Every choice is generally filled with ambiguity and it really comes down to weighing two evils and deciding which one you can live with more.

[Vilegrim]

That reminds me, I CAN be ok with an antagonist that is not a piece of man meat, but I'd prefer a very specific archetype.  The wizened old mage.  A gandalf type figure, or Tellah of old, or Jolee Bindo.  Not some raw grizzled soldier type.  And frankly, Geralt basically looks like a standard soldier.  Yes he has powers, but he does not look like a wielder of arcane power.
 
Every single rpg I have ever played, I had my primary character be some kind of mage or power wielder.  In mass effect it was an adept.  The one exception was in baldurs gate 2 where I rolled a monk a couple of times, but the monk is not a standard fighter in that his power is HIMSELF, not in what metal stick he chose to pick up / finds.  HE IS THE POWER.
 
Nothing about the aesthetics of Geralt convey that, he LOOKS like his primary source of danger is in his martial skill.

Geralt is one of the most dangerous swordsmen alive, and looks it, but getting to that state involves alot of bleeding and it shows, people who fight get wounded, and scars aren't pretty, I ilke that about the look, ugly world with ugly people in it fits the tone perfectly, but I understand not everyone likes that.

[pengwin21]

Superman doesn't brutally murder people in defense of someone who could actually be a murderous cannibal as her sentence read. What Geralt saw was a pretty grey situation - on one hand, this woman's sentence could be completely justified. He doesn't know that. On the other, the soldiers were completely sadistic and reveling in it far too much. 

 

He chose to kill them. 

 

It really can't be compared to saving a schoolbus full of children from a supervillain. 

 

If Superman saw a criminal getting tortured by policemen, he'd knock the policemen out at least. Same basic decision here, although bloodier.

 

Admittedly, it's difficult to show an actual morally ambiguous situation in a short trailer. If the young woman were actually shown to be a dangerous witch/cannibal/etc. in the future that would have made it more effective for me.

[AresKeith]

Guess the BSN can't go a week without a Witcher vs DA argument, and obvious bait thread

[Zered]

I am a great fan of the Witcher books and the lore and the whole setting.

[Darkly Tranquil]

Protecting the innocent who can't defend themselves against cruel and monstrous behavior isn't very morally ambiguous- that's what Superman does. The trailer is trying to go into philosophies about shades of grey, but seems to miss the point entirely.

No, you're missing the point - she's probably guilty of the crimes she's accused of (apparently the scene in the book from which this taken indicates she is), so she's not an innocent (there are almost no truly "good" characters in Witcher). The point is - she has done evil (killing wounded, theft, cannibalism) and the men charged with capturing and executing her are doing evil (getting off on brutalising her); whatever evil she has done does not justify their evil. Geralt can't change any evil she has done, but he can prevent their evil. Geralt is a Witcher (an order of monster slayers), and he is slaying monsters, some of which wear human faces.