15857 réponses à ce sujet

[Hinjo]

How old is Ciri meant to be?

She's 16-17 at the end of Lady of the lake. Games are supposed to take place about 5 years after Geralt's death, which would make her 21 years old. But since she is lady of time and space, she might be slightly younger.

[Hazegurl]

That curse is no excuse for the things that he did.  The curse didn't make him do the things he did, he chose to do them, that makes him responsible for them.  Yes, he was a sociopath and he couldn't feel anything, that is an even greater reason for him to be put down.

Fair enough. However, the reason he couldn't feel anything was because of the curse. He was not an unfeeling sociopath beforehand.  Once it's lifted he does feel again. 

 

The way I see it. Geralt cured a lot of people stricken by curses and those people had done terrible things while afflicted, some unawares and others well aware of what they were doing. Man eating werewolves, Strigas, the wight in B&W who killed people trying to lift her own curse, and he auto dialogues wanting to lift the Frog prince's curse(HoS), even though the prince enjoyed alcohol while killing people(though we don't know if he was aware). I didn't see Olgerid as any different. In the end, he has to live with the guilt and pain, probably for the rest of his life. I think that's a far more fitting punishment than putting his soul under eternal damnation.

[nfi42]

Fair enough. However, the reason he couldn't feel anything was because of the curse. He was not an unfeeling sociopath beforehand.  Once it's lifted he does feel again. 

 

The way I see it. Geralt cured a lot of people stricken by curses and those people had done terrible things while afflicted, some unawares and others well aware of what they were doing. Man eating werewolves, Strigas, the wight in B&W who killed people trying to lift her own curse, and he auto dialogues wanting to lift the Frog prince's curse(HoS), even though the prince enjoyed alcohol while killing people(though we don't know if he was aware). I didn't see Olgerid as any different. In the end, he has to live with the guilt and pain, probably for the rest of his life. I think that's a far more fitting punishment than putting his soul under eternal damnation.

 

He wasn't unfeeling, but he was at least a cold hearted murderer.  He ran with a bunch of cutthroats with no care but for there own.

 

Nevertheless, I can see Geralt wanting to lift Olgierds "curse",  the short cut scene at the end even shows a changed man.  It might even redeem him of his cold hearted murdering ways.

[Dutchess]

Fair enough. However, the reason he couldn't feel anything was because of the curse. He was not an unfeeling sociopath beforehand.  Once it's lifted he does feel again. 

 

The way I see it. Geralt cured a lot of people stricken by curses and those people had done terrible things while afflicted, some unawares and others well aware of what they were doing. Man eating werewolves, Strigas, the wight in B&W who killed people trying to lift her own curse, and he auto dialogues wanting to lift the Frog prince's curse(HoS), even though the prince enjoyed alcohol while killing people(though we don't know if he was aware). I didn't see Olgerid as any different. In the end, he has to live with the guilt and pain, probably for the rest of his life. I think that's a far more fitting punishment than putting his soul under eternal damnation.

 

Eh, wasn't Olgierd a marauder prior to the deal/curse too? I recall Vlod talking about raiding and raping women, and he was part of Olgierd's band and looked up to his older brother. 

[nfi42]

Eh, wasn't Olgierd a marauder prior to the deal/curse too? I recall Vlod talking about raiding and raping women, and he was part of Olgierd's band and looked up to his older brother. 

 

He was.

[Wolven_Soul]

Fair enough. However, the reason he couldn't feel anything was because of the curse. He was not an unfeeling sociopath beforehand.  Once it's lifted he does feel again. 

 

The way I see it. Geralt cured a lot of people stricken by curses and those people had done terrible things while afflicted, some unawares and others well aware of what they were doing. Man eating werewolves, Strigas, the wight in B&W who killed people trying to lift her own curse, and he auto dialogues wanting to lift the Frog prince's curse(HoS), even though the prince enjoyed alcohol while killing people(though we don't know if he was aware). I didn't see Olgerid as any different. In the end, he has to live with the guilt and pain, probably for the rest of his life. I think that's a far more fitting punishment than putting his soul under eternal damnation.

 

Also fair enough.  Geralt does have a thing for lifting curses, and in all likelihood, the actual Geralt probably would choose to lift that curse.  Olgierd still was not exactly a good person before that curse though.  He did what he did to his brother, and if I am remembering correctly, him and his brother were both bandits before he sacrificed him for his immortality. 

 

In any case, that curse came about because of his selfishness, and the price he paid for it was simply abominable.  Therefore, in my mind, Olgierd is still every bit as responsible for the things he does under that curse.  In my mind, there is a difference between getting cursed as a result of something outside of your control, such as Anabelle in the rat tower, and getting cursed because of something that is entirely your fault. 

 

I am a little more harsh in my view of such things, so I still think eternal damnation is entirely justified in Olgierd's case.

[nfi42]

Decisions, decisions. It's all CDPR's fault.

[slimgrin]

What Olgierd did to his brother was inexcusable to me. I ended up letting him live anyway, because O' Dimm is evil incarnate and I wanted to foil him. Btw, I saw him as a demon, not 'the' devil. I honestly need to replay both expansions to better understand the C&C. B&W especially seems to gate off more story depending on your choices. The way it ended up for me, Syanna's motivations didn't gell, and her hatred for Anna was way over the top. Dettlaff was underdeveloped as well. With HoS, there's a lot of foreshadowing and subtlety that I missed.  

[Wolven_Soul]

What Olgierd did to his brother was inexcusable to me. I ended up letting him live anyway, because O' Dimm is evil incarnate and I wanted to foil him. Btw, I saw him as a demon, not 'the' devil. I honestly need to replay both expansions to better understand the C&C. B&W especially seems to gate off more story depending on your choices. The way it ended up for me, Syanna's motivations didn't gell, and her hatred for Anna was way over the top. Dettlaff was underdeveloped as well. With HoS, there's a lot of foreshadowing and subtlety that I missed.  

 

Yeah, I definitely have to agree that HoS was better than B&W.  The choice between two evil men is quite a bit more interesting than a choice between good and evil.  I do look forward to seeing what happens when I choose to spare Olgierd in my new playthrough. 

 

Demon or devil, O'Dimm is an awesome character.  If they ever do decide to make a new Witcher game, I hope he makes another appearance. 

 

Freaking love the crap out of both expansions though. 

[Hazegurl]

Eh, wasn't Olgierd a marauder prior to the deal/curse too? I recall Vlod talking about raiding and raping women, and he was part of Olgierd's band and looked up to his older brother. 

Olgierd was an officer in the Redanian Free Company (The Wild Ones) which was an elite fighting unit supported by Redania. I'm sure that with it being a war the soldiers did some horrible things. However, I find it hard to believe Vlod when he mentions raping.  This guy couldn't even talk to Shani if you take him upstairs to sit with her in the hay where everyone was making out at the party, and Olgierd shouted at a member of his group for sexually  harassing the daughter of the house, when Geralt first meets him. I find it hard to believe that he would approve of rape before his heart is turned to stone but not afterwards.  

 

I think Olgeird's story is that he was an officer (ataman) and was set up to marry Iris, another noble.  The Borsodi family took their wealth and Iris's family wanted to end the engagement or she would be cut off from her family.  Iris didn't want to lose her family.  A witch(I think) tells Olgeird about the crossroads and a Djinn who would grant his wishes so he set off for a crossroad where he met O'Dimm and the rest is history. 

[ThePhoenixKing]

This discussion regarding Olgeird's capacity to be redeemed really brings the excellent nature of Wild Hunt's moral questions into focus, and it's definitely one of the best aspects to the game. There are upsides and downsides to every moral choice you make, and to its credit, the game never uses them as a springboard for a lecture or scolds the player for picking one option over another. The questions are simply posed, and by and large, the game gives you valid reasons to choose them. That's something I think Bioware's had a problem with recently. It seems like too often when there's a moral choice posed, either all the options are equally terrible and there's no real reason to pick any (the Mage/Templar conflict in DAII, who rules Orlais in Inquisition), or there's an obvious correct answer (Blackwall's fate, not getting Cullen back on lyrium, saving Bull's Chargers). With Wild Hunt, I often found myself genuinely conflicted about what to do. With Inquisition, the answers were either wholly telegraphed, or universally lousy.

[slimgrin]

I've reached the end. Sh*t, I think I'm done. Won't be mopping up all the POI's because I haven't played that way up till now. Only organic exploration. I can't find more side quests, and the main quest is done. So that means my Geralt is sitting next to Ciri, underneath the elm at Corvo Bianco, and he's done with it all...

 

 

It's ok, I can handle this. It's only been since 2009 that I first connected with this universe and I hrrhbbbrhgrtyttrhjrgrnrgrgthbbthbthht.....

 

[Elhanan]

This discussion regarding Olgeird's capacity to be redeemed really brings the excellent nature of Wild Hunt's moral questions into focus, and it's definitely one of the best aspects to the game. There are upsides and downsides to every moral choice you make, and to its credit, the game never uses them as a springboard for a lecture or scolds the player for picking one option over another. The questions are simply posed, and by and large, the game gives you valid reasons to choose them. That's something I think Bioware's had a problem with recently. It seems like too often when there's a moral choice posed, either all the options are equally terrible and there's no real reason to pick any (the Mage/Templar conflict in DAII, who rules Orlais in Inquisition), or there's an obvious correct answer (Blackwall's fate, not getting Cullen back on lyrium, saving Bull's Chargers). With Wild Hunt, I often found myself genuinely conflicted about what to do. With Inquisition, the answers were either wholly telegraphed, or universally lousy.

Cannot say about the tough choices of TW3, but I have had conflicts with sentencing Blackwall, and choosing sides in the civil war. Simply because we have opinions of these events does not equate to a universal truth.

As for the Chargers, have only seen the Iron Bull betray them; he stays benched in my game, so this quest goes unexplored. So I guess I shall agree with only being a single choice for me on this one.

[nfi42]

I've reached the end. Sh*t, I think I'm done. Won't be mopping up all the POI's because I haven't played that way up till now. Only organic exploration. I can't find more side quests, and the main quest is done. So that means my Geralt is sitting next to Ciri, underneath the elm at Corvo Bianco, and he's done with it all...

 

 

It's ok, I can handle this. It's only been since 2009 that I first connected with this universe and I hrrhbbbrhgrtyttrhjrgrnrgrgthbbthbthht.....

 

 

It's why I keep replaying and only yesterday stumbled on the  quest Hidden Messages of the Nilfgaardian Kind and Never Trust Children for the first time.  Not much of a quest but still discovering new things. In mu last playthrough Ifound out for the first time there is correspondence in a house that kicks of the Cat school witcher school treasure hunts,  and no website i've read has said this, they all say stumbling upon the first piece of equipment kicks off the quest.

 

I feel for you, it's the only game I've played that leaves you like this at the end.

[slimgrin]

Cannot say about the tough choices of TW3, but I have had conflicts with sentencing Blackwall, and choosing sides in the civil war. Simply because we have opinions of these events does not equate to a universal truth.

As for the Chargers, have only seen the Iron Bull betray them; he stays benched in my game, so this quest goes unexplored. So I guess I shall agree with only being a single choice for me on this one.

 

Dude. Just give it up. 

[Eelectrica]

Cannot say about the tough choices of TW3, but I have had conflicts with sentencing Blackwall, and choosing sides in the civil war. Simply because we have opinions of these events does not equate to a universal truth.

As for the Chargers, have only seen the Iron Bull betray them; he stays benched in my game, so this quest goes unexplored. So I guess I shall agree with only being a single choice for me on this one.

Yes, we had a few choices in DAI. The opportunity to side with the Templars or Mages for alternate paths through the game was a step in the right direction. Learning more about Calpernia or Samson in the process. +1 points for DAI. Hopefully they expand on that next game. I really want to side with DAI spoiler:

Spoiler

Solas

 

I suppose IB's choice comes home in the Trespasser expansion, so I like that. Most of the other choices didn't have a real big impact though other than companion availability. For me the Blackwall choice is easy - releasing him upsets the Orlesians so of course I'll release him.

 

Thing of it is W3 had choices all throughout the game, choices that directly affected the ending and gave us several unique endings.

Witcher 3 actually reminds me of PS:Torment in a lot of ways given our actions throughout that game also impact on the narrative experience in game. Although I believe Torment has only the one ending, which kind of makes sense give the nature of the character we play in that game.

 

Anyway it's raining and it's cold outside, so I might as well see if I can finish off my latest PS:Torment playthrough - finally up to the Fortress.

[Elhanan]

Yes, we had a few choices in DAI. The opportunity to side with the Templars or Mages for alternate paths through the game was a step in the right direction. Learning more about Calpernia or Samson in the process. +1 points for DAI. Hopefully they expand on that next game. I really want to side with DAI spoiler:

Spoiler

Solas

 
I suppose IB's choice comes home in the Trespasser expansion, so I like that. Most of the other choices didn't have a real big impact though other than companion availability. For me the Blackwall choice is easy - releasing him upsets the Orlesians so of course I'll release him.
 
Thing of it is W3 had choices all throughout the game, choices that directly affected the ending and gave us several unique endings.
Witcher 3 actually reminds me of PS:Torment in a lot of ways given our actions throughout that game also impact on the narrative experience in game. Although I believe Torment has only the one ending, which kind of makes sense give the nature of the character we play in that game.
 
Anyway it's raining and it's cold outside, so I might as well see if I can finish off my latest PS:Torment playthrough - finally up to the Fortress.

Have never played PS:T, though I own a couple of copies to be played some day. And I have placed Blackwall in the Warden's mostly; uncertain if I did all three times or not, though. But this might be more difficult choice for a female Inq in a romantic bond with him; uncertain. I rarely use him either, usually not until the next Divine has been selected.

[nfi42]

Have never played PS:T, though I own a couple of copies to be played some day. And I have placed Blackwall in the Warden's mostly; uncertain if I did all three times or not, though. But this might be more difficult choice for a female Inq in a romantic bond with him; uncertain. I rarely use him either, usually not until the next Divine has been selected.

 

you'll just have to trust us when we say it doesn't compare.  The game is that good.

[Elhanan]

you'll just have to trust us when we say it doesn't compare.  The game is that good.

PS:T? So I have heard; reason I have two copies....

[nfi42]

PS:T? So I have heard; reason I have two copies....

 

Yo going to play them both?

 

the other game.

[Xetykins]

I climbed the Wall and released him. Started with Cullen on the second pt which I did not finish, but I was not impressed. He was too... clean. I liked Blackwall's drama. I have to say it was one of the few things DAI did well

[nfi42]

I climbed the Wall and released him. Started with Cullen on the second pt which I did not finish, but I was not impressed. He was too... clean. I liked Blackwall's drama. I have to say it was one of the few things DAI did well

 

lol, I had the opposite opinion on him. I just couldn't relate to him,   I didn't romance him so probably missed the depth of character.

[Wolven_Soul]

I've reached the end. Sh*t, I think I'm done. Won't be mopping up all the POI's because I haven't played that way up till now. Only organic exploration. I can't find more side quests, and the main quest is done. So that means my Geralt is sitting next to Ciri, underneath the elm at Corvo Bianco, and he's done with it all...

 

 

It's ok, I can handle this. It's only been since 2009 that I first connected with this universe and I hrrhbbbrhgrtyttrhjrgrnrgrgthbbthbthht.....

 

 

There there, it'll be alright, we'll all get through this somehow. 

[Wolven_Soul]

Yes, we had a few choices in DAI. The opportunity to side with the Templars or Mages for alternate paths through the game was a step in the right direction. Learning more about Calpernia or Samson in the process. +1 points for DAI. Hopefully they expand on that next game. I really want to side with DAI spoiler:

Spoiler

Solas

 

I suppose IB's choice comes home in the Trespasser expansion, so I like that. Most of the other choices didn't have a real big impact though other than companion availability. For me the Blackwall choice is easy - releasing him upsets the Orlesians so of course I'll release him.

 

Thing of it is W3 had choices all throughout the game, choices that directly affected the ending and gave us several unique endings.

Witcher 3 actually reminds me of PS:Torment in a lot of ways given our actions throughout that game also impact on the narrative experience in game. Although I believe Torment has only the one ending, which kind of makes sense give the nature of the character we play in that game.

 

Anyway it's raining and it's cold outside, so I might as well see if I can finish off my latest PS:Torment playthrough - finally up to the Fortress.

 

The thing of it is though, is that I just didn't agonize over siding with Mages or Templars the way I did with some of Witcher's decisions, because they just didn't make it mean anything in the end.  We don't have any interactions with Samson or Calpurnia.  That war is something that should have been going on throughout the entire game, but it ends with the first act. 

 

None of DA:I's decisions made me agonize over them.  Bioware needs some work in this area.  Stop making things so black and white all the time. 

 

Ya know, I think that is one of the strengths of a set protagonist that we've been overlooking all this time.  When you can make a custom character, we assign that character the personality we want them to have.  And so we base our decisions on that personality because we're role playing it.  We're playing an human hating Elf?  Then we always do things like tell off King What's-His-Face in DA:O.  Which, don't get me wrong, is not a bad thing at all, I enjoy that. 

 

With Geralt and other set characters though, their base personality is already set.  So I think that gives us more room to really consider those decisions a little more deeply than we might have otherwise. 

[Akrabra]

Ya know, I think that is one of the strengths of a set protagonist that we've been overlooking all this time.  When you can make a custom character, we assign that character the personality we want them to have.  And so we base our decisions on that personality because we're role playing it.  We're playing an human hating Elf?  Then we always do things like tell off King What's-His-Face in DA:O.  Which, don't get me wrong, is not a bad thing at all, I enjoy that. 

 

With Geralt and other set characters though, their base personality is already set.  So I think that gives us more room to really consider those decisions a little more deeply than we might have otherwise. 

Then again you could end up with a game where you don't like the set character, and then where do you go? Atleast with character creation you have the freedom to make whoever you want. Truth is i want the balance, i want some backstory to ground your created character and give them motivation. Hawke had potential to be like that in DA:II as you brought in the family element and a more set background story, but the game failed on many other levels (atleast for me).

Then you have a game like Fallout 4 which tried the same, but upset a huge chunk of the fanbase because it didn't offer the freedom they were used to, but the same people like The Witcher 3 for having a set protag? Where do you go from there? Or did people dislike Fallout 4 because it didn't offer a great story? Atleast ME:A is making the change i wanted them to, making both characters you can choose appear in the game regardless of your choice. 

 

I guess choice to me in an RPG is rather who i can be, and not what i can decide in the world, so it doesn't matter as much to me as it does to others.