The Witcher 4 Narrative Director Philipp Weber and Game Director Sebastian Kalemba responded to the backlash and criticism the announcement trailer received after it was revealed during The Game Awards.Fandom Pulse is a reader-supported publication.
The dumbest thing about this is that Ciri is canonically MUCH MORE POWERFUL than a mere witcher, being a magical Source and heir of the Elder Blood, who (as of the end of the 3rd game) had enough control of her massive magical potential to end the White Frost. It's like casting Wonder Woman as the new Batman; it doesn't make sense in terms of either character.
It makes sense in terms of the character's motivations. She doesn't WANT any of it. She WANTS to be a Witcher. There are plenty of narrative ways they can have her lose or give up her powers during or after the White Frost event.
Well, if you leave the decision up to her at the end of W3, she decides to become the Empress of Nilfgaard -- not necessarily because she wants to, but she thinks she should. That always made more sense to me than having her become a witcher, which no one really does voluntarily in the books. Why would she subject herself to the Trial of Grasses, even if she thought it would work? Why were the writers so dead set on making her one? It all has a very "season twelve" feel to it, the kind of thing writers do when they're out of actual good ideas.
The "good" ending was the empress ending. "Good" if you can look past the fact she'll despise the rest of her life. The best ending was Ciri being herself. Why is this best? Geralt teaches Ciri his code of neutrality in the books. Not getting involved in politics. In the books, she rejects her ordained "destiny" and declares that following Geralt and being a Witcher is her destiny. Treating her well in TW3 leads her to doing just that, and thus accepting the way of the Witcher, as we can most likely conclude. Geralt would most definitely support her freedom to choose, otherwise he'd be a hypocrite.
CDPR is dead set on writing a story that'll make you cry as they always have, I think they probably have a good narrative that allows for the Trial, but we should wait for the game to release before judging.
Vesemir's last words before death are more compelling than any:
"You were always an unruly child. I always adored that about you. Now, FLY!"
"What I can say is that we really want to respect everything that came before, that being the books by Andrzej Sapkowski and all three Witcher games"
You Retconned the BOOKS the SECOND Ciri drank a Witchers Potion and Casts a Sign. You people are Frauds and I don't care what poor excuse you use. It likely will be she "Traveled back in Time" to take the Trial of Grasses, but that STILL doesn't work on Women or Adults. Also you will say she "Regained" her ability to use Magic, but that isn't possible since if it wasn't for her drawing from Fire, she would have died in the Desert(the reaction caused a Storm that Signaled nearby People).
Nowhere in the books does it say women can't be Witchers, just that it's never happened before. You know what else never happened before? Ciri.
There are these things called exceptions in regards to exclusive organizations, and they happen throughout history, in fiction and in real life. There is zero reason why a character many consider the most powerful human can’t be that exception.
How about first of all the Games are a CONTINUATION of the Books, not "fan-fiction". The Games use the Books as a Foundation and build off them.
Second the Books DO say that Women can't be Witchers because their Bodies can't handle the Mutations.
Lastly Ciri CAN NOT become a Witcher due to the Recipe for the Trial of Grasses is lost, it wasn't allowed to be written down, she became "numb" to magic after the Desert Incident, and Signs are still Spells just One Handed simple ones.
Stop defending Retcons. The people who made Witcher 3 left YEARS AGO, some before Cyberpunk.
Tomato tomato. I make the same point in another comment about it being additional lore. Retcons are a change of *concrete* well-established lore. Your points have always been vague topics in the books. This was intentional by Sapkowski in order to keep the possibility open. If he wanted to shut down all possibility of Ciri being his next witcher protagonist, he would have been very explicit.
"[...] the SECOND Ciri drank a Witchers Potion"
I'm sorry, but I must say I find it a little funny you got that far into the trailer without noticing Ciri had Witcher eyes and then made a vitriolic youtube video saying as much lol. Just a lack of due diligence that foreshadows the rest.
Your whole comment section disagrees with you while you call them "Normie Retărds" and tell them to "fuck off". 'ă' still registers as 'a' in language filters btw.
The books just don't say women explicitly cannot become Witchers. You can re-read them, you can google it, ask ChatGPT, I don't care. You're just caught up in online bullshit from people who like to say they read, but don't. What the books DO say is that there has never been a woman witcher. Ciri is already made an exception to this in books and continued lore, in all ways except the Trial. She's not even a normal human, this simply isn't a stretch.
As for the Trial method being lost, this is definitely a hurdle sure, but I simply cannot fathom how you've managed to turn this into absolute certainty. Lost does not mean gone. If Sapkowski had zero intention of getting rid of the Trials for good, he would not have used the word "lost" to begin with. Again, just the author keeping things open-ended. It is ALSO not impossible for the process to be recreated.
As long as you must stop short of saying "impossible", you can't call it a retcon. Sorry.
As for it being "bad writing", let's allow CDPR's entire track record speak for itself. Phantom Liberty didn't miss a beat, so you can't say they've lost their writing chops. We've seen nothing but snippets of information in the trailer, not even a single plot point. If you can't envision a way to write this well, it doesn't mean they can't.
"The people who made Witcher 3 left YEARS AGO"
Either you aren't aware that this isn't completely true, or you're being dishonest. 11 original devs left, some did so because of the Cyberpunk crunch schedule following shit marketing decisions, some had their own reasons. That's how the business is, and it's blown way out of proportion as their turn-over rate was and is extremely low compared to the rest of the industry. Quite a number of original devs remain, and SOME have remained since The Witcher 1.
HAHAHAHA you are just another retărd who acts like they read the books, but just uses Google to find all the answers.
You move the Goal Post of what a Retcon is because you Googled to find out you are full of shit, and don't want to admit it.
It is VERY clear that a Woman can NOT become a Witcher due to their Bodies, and is even stated by Characters like Triss. Also Adults can NOT become Witchers because their Bodies are already full developed.
The Author made it clear that it was impossible for new Witchers to be created due to the THEME of Witchers in the Story is that like Monsters, they will eventually die off and no longer be needed. He DID make it impossible, but because he didn't spell it out for you, you act like they could recreate the Grasses. Even though that would require THOUSANDS of test subjects and HUNDREDS of years.
Then you ADMIT the the Witcher 3 Devs left, but conveniently leave out how important their roles were. Many were Writers, Directors, and Designers who are the ones who made Witcher 3 the masterpiece it is.
Then the worst thing you admit to, is looking into my Channel, not watching the Video, and Dïck Riding the other Retărds like yourself who know nothing about the Books and are Gaslighting the people who do.
So go ahead and respond with more Gaslighting and Moving of the Goal Post. It's all you idiots know how to do anyway.
Silly me for thinking you would read my comment carefully, let alone engage in civil discourse. I say again, 'ă' still registers as 'a' in language filters. If they're there, you're not circumventing them, you just come off as more intentionally vitriolic lol.
Yawn. You've yet to prove anything explicit from the text or that anything is retconned, nor is it a tragedy if they did. They definitely did in all the games. Ball remains in your awkward court.
As long as you must stop short of saying "impossible", you can't call it a retcon. Sorry.
As for devs leaving, dude I was pointing out YOUR bad faith lie, and you're gonna backpeddle with whataboutism? Take the L. Yes, their roles were important, and they were subsequently filled. Some remain. Prove something, man... SOMETHING. And do it without making a speculative opinion piece only 14yo's with no literacy get on board with.
Nobody except you is moving goal posts and gaslighting, I'm sticking to YOUR claims. I definitely did watch your video... unfortunately.
They've been modifying the lore and telling compelling stories since TW1. It's the minority incel gamer crowd making such a big deal about THIS issue. If you have a narrative issue that prevents them from telling a good story like they always have, then argue THAT. Until then, we all know the real reason you don't want to play as Ciri.
HAHAHAHA So even this Site has Leftards on it like this Austin Sharpe loser.
He tried to repeatedly Gaslight me, Failed, Commented again with more Gaslighting and saying "The Balls In Your Court", but then BLOCKS ME!!!!!!!!!!!
The Retărd moved the Goal Post and Gaslite so hard he had to run like a bïtch. He even says he watched my Video(I doubt it) and Dïck Rides the other idiots who know nothing about the Books by saying "your whole comment section disagrees with you".
These people are what is wrong with entertainment. You prove them wrong, they Move the Goal Post, and then Gaslight you into thinking these changes are good.
This is why Gatekeeping is so important. Keep the Retărds, Creeps, and Freaks out of Entertainment!!!!!!
As I've been writing in the CDPR forums and Steam, my simple opinion is this:
Bringing back a character from W3 was, imho, the most boring (and safest) choice they could have made. We had our time with these characters and, as good as they were, I wanted fresh ones and a custom protagonist so I could, you know, actually ROLE-PLAY in my ROLE-PLAYING game.
If they really wanted it to be 'about us' then why have they given us a fixed player AGAIN?
The Witcher world has the potential to be much more mature than most games with a vibrant palette of colours AND a wide spectrum of moral greys for the player to paint their own story with...but now we'll have to be once more constrained by a mostly fixed personality.
I didn't want dark fantasy medieval Mass Effect/Cyberpunk...I wanted something with more freedom.
Well, you know, that's just like, your opinion, man. Ciri was the most organic choice. She was literally propped up as a new protagonist in both TW3 and Sapkowski's novels. They're adhering to an original story, so why the hell would they go rogue with an unfamiliar character while leaving behind the most important, most powerful person in the universe at the age of 21? Make that make sense.
The Witcher was never going to be Skyrim. Not sure why you were expecting that.
Never said I was expecting that, only hoping for it ;)
My reason for hoping was that they said they were moving away from Geralt and I'd have liked (not expected!) that to mean 'Geralt & Co.'
You say they are adhering to an original story (which they are not btw, if you mean the books) but if I want to be generous and say they are I would respond: there was no need to. The trilogy was wrapped up nicely, no loose ends to tie up and it'll have been over a decade since W3 by the time this game releases.
Continuity isn't exactly key here.
As mentioned, it's not sticking to an original story is it? So that argument makes no sense. This will be all new lore so...*shrug*
If you mean 'original story' in terms of their 'fan-fiction' as you mention in another post, then it's all a moot point isn't it? Because it's their story so they can change it as and when they want or even just ditch it.
Ciri's trilogy could have been a separate series for example. From a business perspective, all that matters is trying to judge what the fans have an appetite for.
It's also interesting you mention Skyrim because that game is ancient. Kinda shows how few big games go with the custom char and wide scope for role play anymore. Sad.
Ciri being yet another 'destined chosen one' with godly powers doesn't mean much when they then have to nerf her anyway to make it fit. They are actively having to change her in order to squeeze her in. I mean sure, they'll think of something, anyone could, but why not choose something new and fresh that doesn't require a load of gymnastics?
And this is, apparently, the start of another trilogy? Yikes...there goes any chance of playing your own witcher during the time just after the conjunction or something within the next 15 years. Some of us might be dead by then, lol.
For a gamer with my tastes it's disappointing but hey, it is what it is...sometimes you get what you want, sometimes you don't.
Yeah several years ago they said the next installment "wouldn't focus on Geralt", because at the time, they knew they wanted to retire Geralt but they weren't sure yet whether or not he would even be in the game. I think even then they wanted to stay with a character players cared about.
Yeah I say adhering to an original story, I mean playing off that original story instead of going rogue. ALL the games are new lore of course, with minimal retconning to make it possible for the games to exist. If you know of a particularly egregious case of retconning, I'd be curious to know, because I always had the impression they handled the text with as much care and respect as what was necessary. I think that mentality has always stuck with them, and while their telling of Geralt's story definitely feels conclusive (you're right we don't even NEED a new Witcher game), Ciri's could just be getting started. If she weren't literally tied to the fate of the world in TW3, leaving her behind while still young would be no big deal. I just think there's a lot to work with there.
Whether it was the right move to pass the torch directly instead of maybe giving her a spinoff series, we'll see. Personally I like continuity when it's just a tight-knit group of characters that all know each other. If this was a huge epic like LotR or ASOIAF, spin-offs are almost a necessity.
I relate to your preference, and there are games for that. Skyrim was a sloppy comparison admittedly, and isn't well written to CDPR standards. I just don't think that's their MO. The Cyberpunk original lore was more about the setting and gave them a sandbox to work with, whereas Sapkowski's novels are largely driven by its characters. Their biggest challenge will be trading Geralt's perspective with Ciri's and remaining compelling. I wonder if the Trials harden her emotions like in the case of other witchers.
The modding community did some cool stuff in TW3, maybe they'll do something wild here.
Perfectly fine to feel that way, thanks for the well considered reply :)
As for retconning, no, I have no complaints as I'm not one of those who say it 'breaks the lore'. I can discuss things like that based on the little I know for the sake of conversation (and can sympathise with those that are bothered by it) but that's not really my bag; I only know the games you see.
Back when W1 came out I considered reading the books but couldn't quickly find any on Amazon in English and then never got around to it.
I agree that CDPR writing is better than Bethesda...and then some. Which I suppose is another reason I loved the idea of more freedom for the role-play in terms of choice and consequence that a custom char would possibly allow. More freedom but with CDPR writing and production values? Nice ;)
Yes, I may give W3 yet another playthrough and try and mod to the max as I now have a much better PC than when I originally played!
Yeah the English versions dragged on. TW3 was my introduction, then I read the books, then TW1&2. In hindsight he was right to be contentious regarding the translations, but what can you do.
"We Poles, we say, 'Translations are like women: if they are beautiful, they are not true; if they are true, they are not beautiful." -Sapkowski
Cheers! Hoping I don't end up eating my words, but they've yet to tell a bad story IMHO.
Edit: except for Dijkstra suddenly losing his brain at the end of Reason of State, fuck that rush job.
The dumbest thing about this is that Ciri is canonically MUCH MORE POWERFUL than a mere witcher, being a magical Source and heir of the Elder Blood, who (as of the end of the 3rd game) had enough control of her massive magical potential to end the White Frost. It's like casting Wonder Woman as the new Batman; it doesn't make sense in terms of either character.
It makes sense in terms of the character's motivations. She doesn't WANT any of it. She WANTS to be a Witcher. There are plenty of narrative ways they can have her lose or give up her powers during or after the White Frost event.
Well, if you leave the decision up to her at the end of W3, she decides to become the Empress of Nilfgaard -- not necessarily because she wants to, but she thinks she should. That always made more sense to me than having her become a witcher, which no one really does voluntarily in the books. Why would she subject herself to the Trial of Grasses, even if she thought it would work? Why were the writers so dead set on making her one? It all has a very "season twelve" feel to it, the kind of thing writers do when they're out of actual good ideas.
The "good" ending was the empress ending. "Good" if you can look past the fact she'll despise the rest of her life. The best ending was Ciri being herself. Why is this best? Geralt teaches Ciri his code of neutrality in the books. Not getting involved in politics. In the books, she rejects her ordained "destiny" and declares that following Geralt and being a Witcher is her destiny. Treating her well in TW3 leads her to doing just that, and thus accepting the way of the Witcher, as we can most likely conclude. Geralt would most definitely support her freedom to choose, otherwise he'd be a hypocrite.
CDPR is dead set on writing a story that'll make you cry as they always have, I think they probably have a good narrative that allows for the Trial, but we should wait for the game to release before judging.
Vesemir's last words before death are more compelling than any:
"You were always an unruly child. I always adored that about you. Now, FLY!"
Put a chick in it and making it fuckin' lame and fuckin' gay!
"What I can say is that we really want to respect everything that came before, that being the books by Andrzej Sapkowski and all three Witcher games"
You Retconned the BOOKS the SECOND Ciri drank a Witchers Potion and Casts a Sign. You people are Frauds and I don't care what poor excuse you use. It likely will be she "Traveled back in Time" to take the Trial of Grasses, but that STILL doesn't work on Women or Adults. Also you will say she "Regained" her ability to use Magic, but that isn't possible since if it wasn't for her drawing from Fire, she would have died in the Desert(the reaction caused a Storm that Signaled nearby People).
This Game is DOA........
Nowhere in the books does it say women can't be Witchers, just that it's never happened before. You know what else never happened before? Ciri.
There are these things called exceptions in regards to exclusive organizations, and they happen throughout history, in fiction and in real life. There is zero reason why a character many consider the most powerful human can’t be that exception.
The games have been fan-fiction since TW1 fyi
"Zero reason"
How about first of all the Games are a CONTINUATION of the Books, not "fan-fiction". The Games use the Books as a Foundation and build off them.
Second the Books DO say that Women can't be Witchers because their Bodies can't handle the Mutations.
Lastly Ciri CAN NOT become a Witcher due to the Recipe for the Trial of Grasses is lost, it wasn't allowed to be written down, she became "numb" to magic after the Desert Incident, and Signs are still Spells just One Handed simple ones.
Stop defending Retcons. The people who made Witcher 3 left YEARS AGO, some before Cyberpunk.
This Game is dead..........
Tomato tomato. I make the same point in another comment about it being additional lore. Retcons are a change of *concrete* well-established lore. Your points have always been vague topics in the books. This was intentional by Sapkowski in order to keep the possibility open. If he wanted to shut down all possibility of Ciri being his next witcher protagonist, he would have been very explicit.
"[...] the SECOND Ciri drank a Witchers Potion"
I'm sorry, but I must say I find it a little funny you got that far into the trailer without noticing Ciri had Witcher eyes and then made a vitriolic youtube video saying as much lol. Just a lack of due diligence that foreshadows the rest.
Your whole comment section disagrees with you while you call them "Normie Retărds" and tell them to "fuck off". 'ă' still registers as 'a' in language filters btw.
The books just don't say women explicitly cannot become Witchers. You can re-read them, you can google it, ask ChatGPT, I don't care. You're just caught up in online bullshit from people who like to say they read, but don't. What the books DO say is that there has never been a woman witcher. Ciri is already made an exception to this in books and continued lore, in all ways except the Trial. She's not even a normal human, this simply isn't a stretch.
As for the Trial method being lost, this is definitely a hurdle sure, but I simply cannot fathom how you've managed to turn this into absolute certainty. Lost does not mean gone. If Sapkowski had zero intention of getting rid of the Trials for good, he would not have used the word "lost" to begin with. Again, just the author keeping things open-ended. It is ALSO not impossible for the process to be recreated.
As long as you must stop short of saying "impossible", you can't call it a retcon. Sorry.
As for it being "bad writing", let's allow CDPR's entire track record speak for itself. Phantom Liberty didn't miss a beat, so you can't say they've lost their writing chops. We've seen nothing but snippets of information in the trailer, not even a single plot point. If you can't envision a way to write this well, it doesn't mean they can't.
"The people who made Witcher 3 left YEARS AGO"
Either you aren't aware that this isn't completely true, or you're being dishonest. 11 original devs left, some did so because of the Cyberpunk crunch schedule following shit marketing decisions, some had their own reasons. That's how the business is, and it's blown way out of proportion as their turn-over rate was and is extremely low compared to the rest of the industry. Quite a number of original devs remain, and SOME have remained since The Witcher 1.
HAHAHAHA you are just another retărd who acts like they read the books, but just uses Google to find all the answers.
You move the Goal Post of what a Retcon is because you Googled to find out you are full of shit, and don't want to admit it.
It is VERY clear that a Woman can NOT become a Witcher due to their Bodies, and is even stated by Characters like Triss. Also Adults can NOT become Witchers because their Bodies are already full developed.
The Author made it clear that it was impossible for new Witchers to be created due to the THEME of Witchers in the Story is that like Monsters, they will eventually die off and no longer be needed. He DID make it impossible, but because he didn't spell it out for you, you act like they could recreate the Grasses. Even though that would require THOUSANDS of test subjects and HUNDREDS of years.
Then you ADMIT the the Witcher 3 Devs left, but conveniently leave out how important their roles were. Many were Writers, Directors, and Designers who are the ones who made Witcher 3 the masterpiece it is.
Then the worst thing you admit to, is looking into my Channel, not watching the Video, and Dïck Riding the other Retărds like yourself who know nothing about the Books and are Gaslighting the people who do.
So go ahead and respond with more Gaslighting and Moving of the Goal Post. It's all you idiots know how to do anyway.
Silly me for thinking you would read my comment carefully, let alone engage in civil discourse. I say again, 'ă' still registers as 'a' in language filters. If they're there, you're not circumventing them, you just come off as more intentionally vitriolic lol.
Yawn. You've yet to prove anything explicit from the text or that anything is retconned, nor is it a tragedy if they did. They definitely did in all the games. Ball remains in your awkward court.
As long as you must stop short of saying "impossible", you can't call it a retcon. Sorry.
As for devs leaving, dude I was pointing out YOUR bad faith lie, and you're gonna backpeddle with whataboutism? Take the L. Yes, their roles were important, and they were subsequently filled. Some remain. Prove something, man... SOMETHING. And do it without making a speculative opinion piece only 14yo's with no literacy get on board with.
Nobody except you is moving goal posts and gaslighting, I'm sticking to YOUR claims. I definitely did watch your video... unfortunately.
They've been modifying the lore and telling compelling stories since TW1. It's the minority incel gamer crowd making such a big deal about THIS issue. If you have a narrative issue that prevents them from telling a good story like they always have, then argue THAT. Until then, we all know the real reason you don't want to play as Ciri.
HAHAHAHA So even this Site has Leftards on it like this Austin Sharpe loser.
He tried to repeatedly Gaslight me, Failed, Commented again with more Gaslighting and saying "The Balls In Your Court", but then BLOCKS ME!!!!!!!!!!!
The Retărd moved the Goal Post and Gaslite so hard he had to run like a bïtch. He even says he watched my Video(I doubt it) and Dïck Rides the other idiots who know nothing about the Books by saying "your whole comment section disagrees with you".
These people are what is wrong with entertainment. You prove them wrong, they Move the Goal Post, and then Gaslight you into thinking these changes are good.
This is why Gatekeeping is so important. Keep the Retărds, Creeps, and Freaks out of Entertainment!!!!!!
As I've been writing in the CDPR forums and Steam, my simple opinion is this:
Bringing back a character from W3 was, imho, the most boring (and safest) choice they could have made. We had our time with these characters and, as good as they were, I wanted fresh ones and a custom protagonist so I could, you know, actually ROLE-PLAY in my ROLE-PLAYING game.
If they really wanted it to be 'about us' then why have they given us a fixed player AGAIN?
The Witcher world has the potential to be much more mature than most games with a vibrant palette of colours AND a wide spectrum of moral greys for the player to paint their own story with...but now we'll have to be once more constrained by a mostly fixed personality.
I didn't want dark fantasy medieval Mass Effect/Cyberpunk...I wanted something with more freedom.
Hey I wouldn't waste you time with that loser anymore. That Austin idiot pulled the Ultimate Bitch Move with a "Comment Then Block Combo".
He is a Leftard who is just looking for Attention..........
Well, you know, that's just like, your opinion, man. Ciri was the most organic choice. She was literally propped up as a new protagonist in both TW3 and Sapkowski's novels. They're adhering to an original story, so why the hell would they go rogue with an unfamiliar character while leaving behind the most important, most powerful person in the universe at the age of 21? Make that make sense.
The Witcher was never going to be Skyrim. Not sure why you were expecting that.
Never said I was expecting that, only hoping for it ;)
My reason for hoping was that they said they were moving away from Geralt and I'd have liked (not expected!) that to mean 'Geralt & Co.'
You say they are adhering to an original story (which they are not btw, if you mean the books) but if I want to be generous and say they are I would respond: there was no need to. The trilogy was wrapped up nicely, no loose ends to tie up and it'll have been over a decade since W3 by the time this game releases.
Continuity isn't exactly key here.
As mentioned, it's not sticking to an original story is it? So that argument makes no sense. This will be all new lore so...*shrug*
If you mean 'original story' in terms of their 'fan-fiction' as you mention in another post, then it's all a moot point isn't it? Because it's their story so they can change it as and when they want or even just ditch it.
Ciri's trilogy could have been a separate series for example. From a business perspective, all that matters is trying to judge what the fans have an appetite for.
It's also interesting you mention Skyrim because that game is ancient. Kinda shows how few big games go with the custom char and wide scope for role play anymore. Sad.
Ciri being yet another 'destined chosen one' with godly powers doesn't mean much when they then have to nerf her anyway to make it fit. They are actively having to change her in order to squeeze her in. I mean sure, they'll think of something, anyone could, but why not choose something new and fresh that doesn't require a load of gymnastics?
And this is, apparently, the start of another trilogy? Yikes...there goes any chance of playing your own witcher during the time just after the conjunction or something within the next 15 years. Some of us might be dead by then, lol.
For a gamer with my tastes it's disappointing but hey, it is what it is...sometimes you get what you want, sometimes you don't.
Yeah several years ago they said the next installment "wouldn't focus on Geralt", because at the time, they knew they wanted to retire Geralt but they weren't sure yet whether or not he would even be in the game. I think even then they wanted to stay with a character players cared about.
Yeah I say adhering to an original story, I mean playing off that original story instead of going rogue. ALL the games are new lore of course, with minimal retconning to make it possible for the games to exist. If you know of a particularly egregious case of retconning, I'd be curious to know, because I always had the impression they handled the text with as much care and respect as what was necessary. I think that mentality has always stuck with them, and while their telling of Geralt's story definitely feels conclusive (you're right we don't even NEED a new Witcher game), Ciri's could just be getting started. If she weren't literally tied to the fate of the world in TW3, leaving her behind while still young would be no big deal. I just think there's a lot to work with there.
Whether it was the right move to pass the torch directly instead of maybe giving her a spinoff series, we'll see. Personally I like continuity when it's just a tight-knit group of characters that all know each other. If this was a huge epic like LotR or ASOIAF, spin-offs are almost a necessity.
I relate to your preference, and there are games for that. Skyrim was a sloppy comparison admittedly, and isn't well written to CDPR standards. I just don't think that's their MO. The Cyberpunk original lore was more about the setting and gave them a sandbox to work with, whereas Sapkowski's novels are largely driven by its characters. Their biggest challenge will be trading Geralt's perspective with Ciri's and remaining compelling. I wonder if the Trials harden her emotions like in the case of other witchers.
The modding community did some cool stuff in TW3, maybe they'll do something wild here.
Perfectly fine to feel that way, thanks for the well considered reply :)
As for retconning, no, I have no complaints as I'm not one of those who say it 'breaks the lore'. I can discuss things like that based on the little I know for the sake of conversation (and can sympathise with those that are bothered by it) but that's not really my bag; I only know the games you see.
Back when W1 came out I considered reading the books but couldn't quickly find any on Amazon in English and then never got around to it.
I agree that CDPR writing is better than Bethesda...and then some. Which I suppose is another reason I loved the idea of more freedom for the role-play in terms of choice and consequence that a custom char would possibly allow. More freedom but with CDPR writing and production values? Nice ;)
Yes, I may give W3 yet another playthrough and try and mod to the max as I now have a much better PC than when I originally played!
Yeah the English versions dragged on. TW3 was my introduction, then I read the books, then TW1&2. In hindsight he was right to be contentious regarding the translations, but what can you do.
"We Poles, we say, 'Translations are like women: if they are beautiful, they are not true; if they are true, they are not beautiful." -Sapkowski
Cheers! Hoping I don't end up eating my words, but they've yet to tell a bad story IMHO.
Edit: except for Dijkstra suddenly losing his brain at the end of Reason of State, fuck that rush job.
Yeah, their stories have been great so far.
Haha, poor old Dijkstra...what possessed him to behave that way ;)