So I finally finished Blood and Wine. Really liked it. Surprised again by how saccharine it could all be - without intending or realizing it could be different I ended up with a somewhat poignant ending. Kind of like the base game, honestly.
In the lead up to TW3, they strongly hinted they weren't going to do this. But as soon as you leave White Orchard it becomes like Skyrim or any other game in this regard: you have an urgent mission...but let's see if that peasant plays Gwent first. Or what's on top of that hill? Don't I hear some wolves growling over there?
I've never known an open world game to crack this particular nut.
Edit- Murky Waters?? Lol. TW1 on the brain
Fallout New Vegas was overall fine with this.
First you're looking for revenge , so it's up to the player to set this up.
Then you have the Hoover Dam conflict , it's a bit more urgent but it's vague enough it could happen in a couple of weeks or months.
Skyrim was also Okish because you didn't have to trigger the Dragonborn stuff , depending on what you do you might not know you're the Chosen One who has to save the world.
I had a playthrough when I mostly played a terrible thief and not the dragonborn.
In the lead up to TW3, they strongly hinted they weren't going to do this. But as soon as you leave White Orchard it becomes like Skyrim or any other game in this regard: you have an urgent mission...but let's see if that peasant plays Gwent first. Or what's on top of that hill? Don't I hear some wolves growling over there?
I've never known an open world game to crack this particular nut.
Edit- Murky Waters?? Lol. TW1 on the brain
The only game i've played that did this is Fallout 1, as soon as you come out of Vault the global timer starts. If you don't finish the main quest fast enough and destroy the main villain, the super-mutants will discover your Vault and destroy it which results in game over. While the mechanic is interesting, a lot of people hated it because it forces you to rush.
I've never considered distractions to be the flaw, if this was the case i would hate every single RPG and open-world game, i actually welcome them and i can't really imagine Witcher doing this, especially since it has world that encourages you to explore.
In the lead up to TW3, they strongly hinted they weren't going to do this. But as soon as you leave White Orchard it becomes like Skyrim or any other game in this regard: you have an urgent mission...but let's see if that peasant plays Gwent first. Or what's on top of that hill? Don't I hear some wolves growling over there?
I've never known an open world game to crack this particular nut.
Edit- Murky Waters?? Lol. TW1 on the brain
I agree, though I will say that this has more to do with the player than the game. IRL, casinos aren't gonna stop existing because your kid gets kidnapped. Once you discover Ciri could be in Novigrad, you can head straight there. You don't have to help Keira, the baron, or take that contract, or collect all the cards. Once you realize she's no longer in Novigrad, you can drop everything to head to Skellige. You don't have to help Dandelion, Triss, Roche, or Dijsktra w/ Radovid. Once you learn about Uma, you can head straight for the Baron's castle to get him. You may not have the best outcome, but it can be done. I don't know how the devs can force the player to roleplay an urgent story when the player themselves know it's a game, know they will win no matter what, and therefore choose to go cave exploring rather than find their missing kid.
The only game i've played that did this is Fallout 1, as soon as you come out of Vault the global timer starts. If you don't finish the main quest fast enough and destroy the main villain, the super-mutants will discover your Vault and destroy it which results in game over. While the mechanic is interesting, a lot of people hated it because it forces you to rush.
That doesn't seem like a bad idea. If there was some sort of hidden timer in TW3 where if you don't find Ciri in time the Wild Hunt takes her that would force players to see the immediate threat of the Hunt to Ciri's life. But players would just complain about it.
The problem with timers is that they are often stupid. Like in Fallout. It's not really as long as it sounds, because the passage of time is a bit random, and it basically just turns into a "if you're familiar with the game, you can see all content, but if you're not, you're just wasting your time." If there was some timer to get Ciri, or to stop the Hunt, even putting aside complaints, there's no real urgency if you know your way around the game. What comes to mind is the last sequence in Hearts of Stone if you choose to trick the trickser - you can basically loot a cool weapon, get a huge amount of swag, and have time for a smoke break depending on how familiar you are with the layout.
The problem with timers is that they are often stupid. Like in Fallout. It's not really as long as it sounds, because the passage of time is a bit random, and it basically just turns into a "if you're familiar with the game, you can see all content, but if you're not, you're just wasting your time." If there was some timer to get Ciri, or to stop the Hunt, even putting aside complaints, there's no real urgency if you know your way around the game. What comes to mind is the last sequence in Hearts of Stone if you choose to trick the trickser - you can basically loot a cool weapon, get a huge amount of swag, and have time for a smoke break depending on how familiar you are with the layout.
A second or third play through is never going to be as fresh as the first. It doesn't matter if the player eventually knows their way around the landscape. What usually matters is the first play through creating that sense of roleplay urgency. After that it's just metagaming anyway. I now know how to keep the three main factions in FO4 from wanting to kill each other, preventing me from having to choose one over the other because I now know when to do certain quests. Players are always gonna find a loophole after playing the game for a while.
A second or third play through is never going to be as fresh as the first. It doesn't matter if the player eventually knows their way around the landscape. What usually matters is the first play through creating that sense of roleplay urgency. After that it's just metagaming anyway. I now know how to keep the three main factions in FO4 from wanting to kill each other, preventing me from having to choose one over the other because I now know when to do certain quests. Players are always gonna find a loophole after playing the game for a while.
But that's exactly my point. There's no real urgency: there's just unfamiliarity. The urgency doesn't come from the plot - it comes from not knowing the terrain. A story is urgent because the stakes are high and time is short, not because you got really bad directions. A movie or book doesn't create urgency - except very rarely - based on the fact that characters don't know where to go. And the urgency in these mystery plots is totally different from an RPG, and the plotting is a lot tighter. Basically, the game just works against itself - because the urgency is always a narrative artefact and artificial, throwing a lot of non-urgency stories doesn't up the stakes, it just undercuts your urgency.
The problem with timers is that they are often stupid. Like in Fallout. It's not really as long as it sounds, because the passage of time is a bit random, and it basically just turns into a "if you're familiar with the game, you can see all content, but if you're not, you're just wasting your time." If there was some timer to get Ciri, or to stop the Hunt, even putting aside complaints, there's no real urgency if you know your way around the game. What comes to mind is the last sequence in Hearts of Stone if you choose to trick the trickser - you can basically loot a cool weapon, get a huge amount of swag, and have time for a smoke break depending on how familiar you are with the layout.
ME2 suffered from this as well.
I agree, though I will say that this has more to do with the player than the game. IRL, casinos aren't gonna stop existing because your kid gets kidnapped. Once you discover Ciri could be in Novigrad, you can head straight there. You don't have to help Keira, the baron, or take that contract, or collect all the cards. Once you realize she's no longer in Novigrad, you can drop everything to head to Skellige. You don't have to help Dandelion, Triss, Roche, or Dijsktra w/ Radovid. Once you learn about Uma, you can head straight for the Baron's castle to get him. You may not have the best outcome, but it can be done. I don't know how the devs can force the player to roleplay an urgent story when the player themselves know it's a game, know they will win no matter what, and therefore choose to go cave exploring rather than find their missing kid.
I don't think it's the player's fault that doing side quests makes the urgency of the main plot less convincing. Yes, you can rush through the main plot more (though I suspect that would end up giving you trouble with being underleveled for some sections at least) but doing so makes you miss out on a lot of game content, and a lot of it more meaningful than just loot and some XP. If you opt to systematically hunt down every smuggler's cache, then I concede you're playing a part in the plot's urgency going out of the window, but for the more important side quests the game actually invites you to do them because of their ties to the mandatory quests. For a long time you're forced to help the Baron find his family. Only the climax is optional but the story has already cleverly ensnared you in wanting to see it all wrapped up, and you get presented with the choice to experience that the same time you learn Ciri could be in Novigrad. "I know you want to go after Ciri, BUT if could help me save Ana..."
And for that you have to go in the opposite direction of where your next Ciri clue waits. So it's not just the player that knows they're playing a game and that the game is not likely to rush you through timed quests without warning. The game knows it's a game, or rather, the developers knew they were making a game and they decided to have side stories branch off the main quests, and they wanted the player to experience them. Of course they wanted the player to see what more their game has to offer in addition to the main story. Why else bother to put so much detail and attention in that "optional" content? You can't hold the player responsible for the lack of urgency in the actual gameplay when the game itself actively sabotages itself on that front. It does so with great stories and experiences, but still.
With the question marks it's a bit different, because they are not this obviously tied to the main quests. But they're still game design meant to tempt the player to explore, to peek your curiosity. "What's over there?" It's a simple reward system but it works. You're tempted to go check out that question mark nearby (you're in the area anyway) and you get rewarded if you do (well, or chased away by a cyclops with ??? as its dangerously high level 
). And then there's another question mark not that far from the one you just reached. And there's another, and another, and oh, you can go from this one and that one and the one over there to the actual place you need to be for your quest.
So, turn off the point of interests on the map? Like I mentioned before, I did for this third run. I've already hunted them all down (the near endless smuggler's caches excepted) previously. That "helps", somewhat. I was no longer such a high level when completing the Baron's quests that I only got 2 XP for them. But guess what? That entire big-ass map is a form of temptation on its own. I've done the Velen main quests and did side and contract quests as much on route as I could. Checked out parts of the map nearby where I suspected something nice and shiny was waiting for me. Baron tells me where Ciri went and asks me to help out. Okay, fine, I can't resist, I'll go to the swamp. But wait... I still have this entire strip of land south (and west and east, as it goes around it) Fyke Isle that's untouched. No quest has directed me there yet... I remember that on the Western coast there were a whole lot of marks for pirate camps and they were a fairly low level. But for the rest? There must be more stuff, suitable for my current level. I don't want to leave such a large part of the world unexplored this time around... Sooo.... I decided to head West from Crow's Perch and then South, so I could go allll the way around Fyke Isle before reaching the Bog. Which actually turned out to not be entirely possible on horseback because eventually you get to the mountain area with the giant oak tree and the world's edge prevents you from going around it, but that's beside the point.
The game is designed around tempting your curiosity and rewarding you for giving in to that temptation. You shouldn't expect a player to put on blinders to resist and race through the bare necessities only. The devs put effort in trying to prevent you (tempt you out of) doing that. They are the ones responsible for the urgency shown in the story not reflecting on the rest of the game. They decided to go open world and they decided on a main story that supposedly has the characters in a contant rush. And the two conflict. They simply do. I don't think there's a perfect solution for it either. As others pointed out, open worlds just aren't very compatible with an urgent main story. But if you'd somehow shrink the world and get rid of most of the question marks you'd still have the story conflicts like continuing to Novigrad in search of Ciri vs. helping the Baron. Unless the swamp was right next to the city, which wouldn't make sense, there would be a (small) cost in how believable it is that Geralt is really, really set on finding Ciri as soon as he possibly can.
So either remove the side content (make the Baron's conclusion a main quest, give him one last piece of info on Ciri to bargain with, or actually get rid of it so the very important urgent main quest is what remains) or accept that the matter is not quite as pressing as they would have liked to go for. I'm not entirely sure how they could have achieved that, mind. If not requiring a major rewrite, I think it would demand nerving the Wild Hunt a fair bit. Maybe they would not be able to jump on Ciri's tail so quickly whenever she uses her powers. Their mages could need more time after creating a portal to another world before they could do it again, which would slow the Hunt down after a failed pursuit.
I don't think it's the player's fault for wanting to explore ruins or help the Baron but I also don't think it's CDPR's fault for including the content the way they did. IMO, it makes the world more alive because it's constantly moving in a sense with or without you influencing it. Just like real life. If your kid is missing you can still go hit the casino and play blackjack if you like, or you can go cave exploring, help out friends, et al. The world doesn't stop moving because you have a kidnapped kid to deal with nor is everything going to wrap up nicely around your situation or everyone else's.
The Baron asked for help in saving his wife, he needs the help no matter what you have to do in your own personal life. You can turn him down and consider finding Ciri your top priority (this is what I did on my first play through) or you can help him out for whatever reason you like. I loved the Baron's story but once I discovered Ciri was in Novigrad, I couldn't justify Geralt trekking back to the swamps when he didn't have to. But does that mean CDPR shouldn't have included this or should have placed the quest in a different order? No. Because it presents the player with a new choice that can be used to help define the type of Geralt they are playing.
I like the fact that Geralt can choose to walk away and head straight to Novigrad after getting the information he needed. He can choose to be done with the Crones for now regardless of the personal business someone else has with them. He can choose to say "It's not my business" and leave. I had Geralt warn both the Baron and the daughter not to head back to the swamps, The Crones were obviously very old and powerful and I had no desire to risk death for the Baron and his "crazy" wife when I had my own problems. If CDPR had forced Geralt to deal with the Crones after multiple attempts at warning the Baron and his kid against it, and after telling the Baron he didn't give a crap about his personal business overall I wouldn't have liked it.
Perhaps a solution is to get rid of leveling so players can focus on the story and not have to worry about how high or low their levels are before going to certain areas or doing quests. idk.
I do agree that the Wild Hunt could have used some tweaking in their tracking of Ciri. What I find odd is that when we traveled with Avallech, we had to wait for portals to open, but the Wild Hunt just opens up portals willy nilly. It would have been better if they simply knew of entry and exit points and had to wait for them to open or something. But then again, the Wild Hunt needed a complete revamp, they were the most disappointing aspect of the entire game right along with the White Frost.
I don't think it's the player's fault for wanting to explore ruins or help the Baron but I also don't think it's CDPR's fault for including the content the way they did. IMO, it makes the world more alive because it's constantly moving in a sense with or without you influencing it. Just like real life. If your kid is missing you can still go hit the casino and play blackjack if you like, or you can go cave exploring, help out friends, et al. The world doesn't stop moving because you have a kidnapped kid to deal with nor is everything going to wrap up nicely around your situation or everyone else's.
The Baron asked for help in saving his wife, he needs the help no matter what you have to do in your own personal life. You can turn him down and consider finding Ciri your top priority (this is what I did on my first play through) or you can help him out for whatever reason you like. I loved the Baron's story but once I discovered Ciri was in Novigrad, I couldn't justify Geralt trekking back to the swamps when he didn't have to. But does that mean CDPR shouldn't have included this or should have placed the quest in a different order? No. Because it presents the player with a new choice that can be used to help define the type of Geralt they are playing.
I like the fact that Geralt can choose to walk away and head straight to Novigrad after getting the information he needed. He can choose to be done with the Crones for now regardless of the personal business someone else has with them. He can choose to say "It's not my business" and leave. I had Geralt warn both the Baron and the daughter not to head back to the swamps, The Crones were obviously very old and powerful and I had no desire to risk death for the Baron and his "crazy" wife when I had my own problems. If CDPR had forced Geralt to deal with the Crones after multiple attempts at warning the Baron and his kid against it, and after telling the Baron he didn't give a crap about his personal business overall I wouldn't have liked it.
Perhaps a solution is to get rid of leveling so players can focus on the story and not have to worry about how high or low their levels are before going to certain areas or doing quests. idk.
I do agree that the Wild Hunt could have used some tweaking in their tracking of Ciri. What I find odd is that when we traveled with Avallech, we had to wait for portals to open, but the Wild Hunt just opens up portals willy nilly. It would have been better if they simply knew of entry and exit points and had to wait for them to open or something. But then again, the Wild Hunt needed a complete revamp, they were the most disappointing aspect of the entire game right along with the White Frost.
Real life isn't a video-game plot. That analogy always fails. There's no narrative to my life. But there is one to TW3. And I experience my life in a way that's totally different from how I experience the narrative. Not to mention that a lot of the side quests hurt the verisimilitude of the world. There are so many dangerous monsters and people die so fast that it honestly makes the wonder how humanity has even avoided extinction. Even the supposedly safe Toussaint is so commonly beset by monsters and bandits that it makes you wonder how they have a functional society.
Not to mention that real life does have a timer. If I **** around to do X, then I don't have time to do Y. But a video game holds the whole world frozen for my to traipse around at my leisure. A timer doesn't help, because if I move quickly enough through the limited objectives (even without foreknowledge), then I get a more optimal outcome.
Levels are irrelevant, because the narrative tension is still there.
As an aside, the portal point seems to be more because Avallach doesn't have the same type of control over them like the Red Riders (including his attempted Ciri copy).
Real life isn't a video-game plot. That analogy always fails. There's no narrative to my life. But there is one to TW3. And I experience my life in a way that's totally different from how I experience the narrative. Not to mention that a lot of the side quests hurt the verisimilitude of the world. There are so many dangerous monsters and people die so fast that it honestly makes the wonder how humanity has even avoided extinction. Even the supposedly safe Toussaint is so commonly beset by monsters and bandits that it makes you wonder how they have a functional society.
I know Real life isn't a video game. But a part of an open world is making that world come to life, meaning mirror reality, not sit around completely stagnant until the player shows up or wrapping up nicely because the player interacts with it. I appreciate the devs at least trying to create the illusion of life moving on by not having every story wrap up before the player moves on. I helped the Baron find his family, but he has another problem, I can stay and help or choose not to. I saved Dandelion, but he's having issues with his tavern, I can stay and help or move on. The game world should have some reflection of reality. After all, you are stepping into the shoes of another person and living in their reality not your own. And I don't see how the real life analogy fails. If you spend all day playing Gwent and not trying to find Ciri, the solution isn't "Get rid of Gwent" or "Tie Gwent to the main quest line" or "Never have a story where you must find someone quickly." the solution is "Start role playing as a father in search of his missing daughter." Especially when the game provides you with the resources to role play in such a manner.
As for the monsters, bandits, and side content. Not seeing how it hurts anything. It shows why Witchers were needed to begin with. If anything, I think the reason why there are so many monsters about is because there are so few Witchers to deal with them.
Not to mention that real life does have a timer. If I **** around to do X, then I don't have time to do Y. But a video game holds the whole world frozen for my to traipse around at my leisure. A timer doesn't help, because if I move quickly enough through the limited objectives (even without foreknowledge), then I get a more optimal outcome.
I wouldn't mind a combo of a timer/do X gates Y sort of deal for variety. In TW3, if certain quests are skipped and the player progress to a certain point in the story the quests fail and a different outcome is created. I wouldn't mind it if some quests had timers while others become gated once you do something else. That way, even if you know the landscape you can't just do everything you want simply because you can do it fast enough. But overall, it was a spur of the moment idea and I'm not invested enough in it to argue about it. I look forward to seeing what CDPR does with Cyberpunk's world.
Whew... after nearly 200 hours - finally finished W3 along with all the DLCs. 
What CDPR had done here was an incredible achievement, so... much... content. And so much of it fleshed out. The kudos they get for their secondary quests are well-earned, no question. BioWare should definitely take notes here. And while I was a little more mixed in my opinion of the main game, the DLCs really helped elevate my overall opinion of it. I felt they were the most interesting/strongest parts of the game.
Main Plot: There were a number interesting characters and situations along the way, marred only by the tediously long questline in finding Ciri. There's one point, where Geralt's standing in a room trying to recruit street-promoters to get the word out for a play he helped write, cast and will have to act in, in order to draw in Dudu, to ask him where Dandelion is, and then rescue him in order to ask him where Ciri is... I'm going, What in the actual @$%# am I even doing here?! I could scour, on foot, the entire @#$%-ing country in the time it's taking me to do this @#$%! 
Taken as individual quests, they're pretty interesting (and varied), but strung together in this nigh-never-ending chain of events in a game of "Where in the world is Ciri Sandiago", it nearly lost me a couple of times.
But when we finally get to the Skellige & Wild Hunt questlines, and finally finding Ciri, it starts picking up again. Playing Ciri and watching her evolution was fun, though I was more than a little ticked that we couldn't gear her up as we wanted. And because Jo Wyatt had voiced her, all I could hear was Hawke.
I think the most interesting thing about the Witcher's quests were the sudden left turns it would take. A string of predictable quests, then-suddenly-I'm-exploring-other-worlds. A string of predictable quests, then suddenly I'm in a painting. A string of predictable quests, then suddenly I'm in a fairy tale land. A string of predictable quests, then suddenly I'm talking to my horse... and she's talking back... and is actually pretty interesting too. That's the sort of thing I wouldn't mind BioWare indulging in more.
Characters: There were a number of interesting characters, though very few we really get a chance to know well (like we would our companions in BioWare game). I liked the ones we could have more creative banter with - Dijkstra, the College of Sorceresses, Yennifer, O'Dimm, Vlodimir, even if we wound up on the losing end of those conversations more often than not. 
CDPR do love their "grey" characters, which adds depth to those that might otherwise have been one-note characters like the Baron.
But since nearly everyone is at least part self-serving @$%#, I felt little empathy for most of them. This is something BioWare should be wary of not falling into the same trap. Other than Ciri and maybe a couple of others like Triss or Priscilla, I felt no attachment to the characters. Whether they lived or died didn't matter and I found myself just taking the path of the greatest reward vs making emotional decisions. BioWare games I feel are better here at eliciting an emotional response, and making emotional decisions over just pragmatic ones.
Game World: The scope of this game is even greater than I was expecting, and I knew going in it would be huge. Kudos to CDPR for putting all that effort in. Cities especially, I can't even imagine the man-hours that went into creating them. Day/Night cycles, dynamic weather, fog, torch-lit streets, etc. Hopefully we'll those first two make it into future DA games. Which makes me all the sadder to say... it's... all kinda boring (except for maybe Beauclair). I think the game engine might be part of the issue with the flat-ish lighting and desaturated feel to the game. But the locales they created are... just not that interesting and constantly dreary weather takes it toll as well (Toussaint being a much-needed breath of fresh air here).
In trying to faithfully recreate Middle Ages Europe - landscape, cities and all, there aren't many visually striking locations. With DAI, I think they took the right route here. Wide variety of environments, each visually striking. The Frostbite Engine really showing its chops here. I think BioWare's other strength here is that (IMO) they have a more interesting setting, one that I wanted to learn more about lore-wise, history and so on. BioWare and Bethesda are good at world-building in general.
Gameplay: There are things BioWare can learn from W3 here - combat on horseback, the races, swimming, climbing, sailing (which was a lot of fun). The fist-fights were so-so though. I wasn't a huge fan of Gwent, but I applaud the addition. I loved the parties in both HoS and B&W and the fun little things you could do during them. These little diversions oddly enough wind up being among the more memorable parts of the game. BioWare does this as well and hopefully they'll continue to do more of them.
Geralt's abilities/combat were... pretty good I'd say. Not great, but not bad. I've tried a number of different combat styles/ability mixes over the course of the game to keep it fresh. The action-y style was a nice change of pace from DAI's combat. Each has their strengths though. I don't think there's really anything DA could learn here, being such a different style, except for the mounted combat perhaps.
Overall, W3 is an incredible game with an astounding amount of effort put into it. And there are things CDPR and BioWare could certainly learn from one another.
I just finished romancing Yen for the first time. It wasn't as great as I thought it would be but also not bad either. I hated how the second love scene was pre-rendered yet was essentially the same old sex animation from the brothels. I love the running wolves touch though. I have to admit that Yen grew on me, I like her much more than I did when I first played the game. I still chose the more defiant options with her though. ie, wearing blue clothes to the wake, telling her off about Emphyr, et al. I have no interest in playing a whipped Geralt. Even if he is much younger in my game(using mods).
Overall, as much as I enjoyed the Yen romance, it didn't really seem any better than romancing Triss, like I thought it would. And like Triss's sickeningly Mary Poppins' sweetness, Yen's 'B*tch with a heart of gold' act can wear thin after a few play throughs. I'm starting to see why Geralt sleeps around. 
Now I'm disappointed B&W didn't have Fringilla Vigo in it. I don't hate Triss or Yen, I would still pick them in a heatbeat over anyone else and I'm glad one romance doesn't really out shine the other, but yeah it just seems like they exist as a foil for the other.
For anyone interested: I'm using the Young Geralt Mod with Real Witcher Eyes (Silver Sky Eyes) and No make-up and new Yen hair on Nexus. I think removing Yen's make up and giving her the new hair makes her look fairly young.
For anyone interested: I'm using the Young Geralt Mod with Real Witcher Eyes (Silver Sky Eyes) and No make-up and new Yen hair on Nexus. I think removing Yen's make up and giving her the new hair makes her look fairly young.
Spoiler
^I know, it's so beautiful you can't even take it...
I'll interpret it however I like.
I just finished romancing Yen for the first time. It wasn't as great as I thought it would be but also not bad either. I hated how the second love scene was pre-rendered yet was essentially the same old sex animation from the brothels. I love the running wolves touch though. I have to admit that Yen grew on me, I like her much more than I did when I first played the game. I still chose the more defiant options with her though. ie, wearing blue clothes to the wake, telling her off about Emphyr, et al. I have no interest in playing a whipped Geralt. Even if he is much younger in my game(using mods).
Overall, as much as I enjoyed the Yen romance, it didn't really seem any better than romancing Triss, like I thought it would. And like Triss's sickeningly Mary Poppins' sweetness, Yen's 'B*tch with a heart of gold' act can wear thin after a few play throughs. I'm starting to see why Geralt sleeps around.
For anyone interested: I'm using the Young Geralt Mod with Real Witcher Eyes (Silver Sky Eyes) and No make-up and new Yen hair on Nexus. I think removing Yen's make up and giving her the new hair makes her look fairly young.
Spoiler
Damn? The doc gave Geralt alot of botox. Enough kill a normal human being.
Damn? The doc gave Geralt alot of botox. Enough kill a normal human being.
lol!! It's basically Geralt 80 or 70 years younger(?), probably how he looked around the time he first became a Witcher. Minus the guy liner.
Geralt with guyliner...
That's just old Geralt looking back on his crazy youth.
lol!! It's basically Geralt 80 or 70 years younger(?), probably how he looked around the time he first became a Witcher. Minus the guy liner.
That's just old Geralt looking back on his crazy youth.
At first I thought it was Geralt with Ciri's complexion...
At first I thought it was Geralt with Ciri's complexion...
I think the version I have uses Ciri's skin (Not sure as there is another version with Ciri's scars on it). But nothing about his facial structure was changed so it's basically what Witcher 3's Geralt would look like if we saw him in his younger years (minus the eye liner, and some of the scars ) .
Retour en haut
