It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like:Chrome,Firefox,Internet Explorer orOpera

×
arrow-down2arrowcart2close4fat-arrow-leftfat-arrow-rightfeedbackfriends2happy-facelogo-gognotificationnotifications-emptyownedremove-menusad-facesearch2wishlist-menuwishlisted2own_thingsheartstartick
avatar
Tristanian: Heh, I know exactly what you mean. I felt the same, when Roche did something well let's say way over the top to Dethmold and at that point, the event itself kinda caught me off guard.

Definitely changed my view towards him.
yeah. i think I'm gonna reload my Roche savegame and let Henselt live this time. sure he was a pig but he DID have a point about the punishment for caught spies.

Dethmold is still fair game though :D
avatar
Tristanian: Other than that, it's mostly up to the player of whether he enjoys a more personal, "fight for the weak" story vs a more political one, so to speak.
avatar
mukhlisz: speaking of politics, in my Roche's Path I helped Radovid gain the upper hand in the summit as Roche had killed Henselt and Radovid seemed like an okay guy and he's married to Adda.

But after watching what he did to Phillipa, i'm not so sure anymore.. :-S
Ah, it hurts..the decisions, don't they. :D

Spoilers*open

I found myself spending may minutes of time away from my PC to deciding, what kind of story I want for my witcher. An ending, in which I break apart all nobles, alliances, heir-achy...or make a solid ending to built up against future Nilfgaard invasion...or/and save the dragon in the process...or/and let Roche follow Temeria...or/and let Roche follow Rodenia..or/and let everything decend into Anarchy saving Triss.....or/and let Henselt have control over Pontor valley...or/and let Stennis be king...aaa..or/and so many..Loredo...Saskie...Sile...Phillipa...Letho...Nilfgaardian Ambassador'...condemn/kill all mages in Luc Mui...So many things..and on..

Spoilers*close

I am forming a consensus, thinking for a lot of time...what would be the best ending for my witcher.

Ah damn, the game is true extra ordinary...never felt this way about a PC video game after a long time..WHAT A GAME..clap clap (Iorveth style)
Post edited June 06, 2011 by Anarki_Hunter
avatar
shivnz: kinda sad. makes me think that cdp focused on the nonhuman path, and treated the human path as an afterthought.

so much for no 'right' choice, and everything being shades of great... clearly cdp intended a very biased path for this game, favouring one path over the other - treating one path is correct and 'good' while the other was not, unlike the first game.... just another reason this game - although its very good - is definately inferior to the brilliant first game.
To be fair, it is almost impossible to write a branching story (one that ends up in a vaguely similar place, anyway, like this one) without figuring out one path first and making the others contrast/compliment it in some way. You'll just end up with a contradictory mess otherwise. They had to choose one, 50/50 it was going to be the Scoia'tael. They certainly did the same thing with the first game, though they got a bit cheap with the first - if you sided with the humans the elves began acting extra dickish, and visa versa if you sided with the elves, to make you feel better about your decision. That didn't happen here, characterization was consistent no matter which path you choose, which earns them props in my book. I think both sides had pros and cons, and it was still a gray decision, though yes, the non-human side came out looking better overall, (especially when Zoltan wants to go join the defenders at Vergen, oh i felt so guilty for dragging him to Henselt's camp at that point) I don't think that's a big flaw. I suspect the writers wanted to nudge you in that direction, because to be frank, they nudged you in that direction in the books too.

I knew from the beginning I'd likely side with the Scoia'tael, I never have finished an Order run of the first game, it grates against the core of my being. I did think though that the human side in 2 had some nice touches and things you never do learn on the other path, like Letho's 2 companions. It also makes the political situation more clear. I had to take a bit of a break during my Iorveth run to brush up on the politics of the world to keep things straight which probably wouldn't have been necessary if i had started with Roche's side of things. Also, the Sabrina thing. And, if you make *just* the right choices, you can bring Roche AND Iorveth with you to Loc Muinne, but only if you go to Henselt's camp. So there are some advantages to going with Roche.

Overall though, I enjoyed Iorveth's path best, mostly because I can't stand to see either Vergen fall, (that it was a non-human city is irrelevant, I don't think Henselt was in the right for invading any city in Aedirn) or Saskia uncured. Vergen itself is an awesome location, though I was surprised just how much of it you got to see on Roche's path anyway, so it actually wasn't a huge deciding factor. (running Iorveth's path first certainly made that bit with the siege a bit easier to navigate! heh)

Also, Iorveth is all kinds of sexy. :p
Post edited June 06, 2011 by Raye
In my opinion the quest design and the writing is much better on Iorveths side, thus I prefer that side as well.

On the side of Roche there is some sloppy writing. E.g. when Henselt and Dethmold needs to turn into antagonists, suddenly old ill-tempered bear Henselt is turned into a rapist seemingly just because everybody can agree that rapists are bad. Same with Dethmold, first he is slightly mad and ruthless, then suddenly he goes into "let's kill of every third man in camp" mode...

Then there are the quests. While the side quests on Iorveths side do involve some running back and forth, the trails traveled are reasonably short. On Henselt's side, I was rather bored after running to the damned house on the cliff for the fourth time. Not to mention Sabrinas deathwheel, or searching the freaking corpses for the Rotfiend quest.
I agree completely. I found in Iorveth path more emotions involved, primary cause:

- I absolutely love the character of Saskia. Right when I though I had found a "pure" character is the bad bad world of the Witcher... bam, I find she's a liar, and all the "hero of the people aura" become meaningless. I *really* enjoyed the final confrontation.

- Since I was a kid I always loved dwarves, and finally there is a game that doesn't picture them like the local buffoon (Peter Jackson, how I hated you). I loved a lot the nights at the tavern in Vergen.
avatar
Kitako: I agree completely. I found in Iorveth path more emotions involved, primary cause:

- I absolutely love the character of Saskia. Right when I though I had found a "pure" character is the bad bad world of the Witcher... bam, I find she's a liar, and all the "hero of the people aura" become meaningless. I *really* enjoyed the final confrontation.

- Since I was a kid I always loved dwarves, and finally there is a game that doesn't picture them like the local buffoon (Peter Jackson, how I hated you). I loved a lot the nights at the tavern in Vergen.
Hmm Saskia promised half of the hoard, i wonder what happened to that
Yeah, the characters and their development was shown better in Iorveth's path. Generally, to me, every part of the plot, quests, lines, everything was better in Vergen than in Kaedwen's camp.
avatar
Germanicanus: Yeah, the characters and their development was shown better in Iorveth's path. Generally, to me, every part of the plot, quests, lines, everything was better in Vergen than in Kaedwen's camp.
Yes I agree, but I did like the fighting tournament quest at the camp. I would have like it a whole lot more if it wasn't so easy, added multiple opponents, captured monsters or offered rewards etc

And no "OOOODDRRRRIIINNNNN" in Vergen + the music score is better :)
Yeah, the Ave Henselt quest was great, shame it was short. Odrin was funny as hell and one of my favorite quotes, but nothing can beat the lesbomancy one ;-) I wish the camp had more interesting characters, f.e I wish instead of Sile there was Sabrina, because she was amusingly cheeky in the novels + would sleep with Geralt even on stones (it's her quote, btw.) ;-)
I loved both sides. But if pushed, I would say I preferred Iorveth's path. Talking to Iorveth made me understand him better and what his goals were. Overall I like that, there is no clear answer regarding who is better. Both side have good and bad points.
Post edited June 06, 2011 by omeara
avatar
Kitako: (...) Right when I though I had found a "pure" character is the bad bad world of the Witcher... bam, I find she's a liar, and all the "hero of the people aura" become meaningless.
Really? Why does that make her less "pure"? I mean, she's a dragon, alright... But dragons are just people, too (at least so it seems in the game).
And lying about that seems rather understandable and reasonable.

Or did I miss something?
avatar
Kitako: (...) Right when I though I had found a "pure" character is the bad bad world of the Witcher... bam, I find she's a liar, and all the "hero of the people aura" become meaningless.
avatar
K_Murx: Really? Why does that make her less "pure"? I mean, she's a dragon, alright... But dragons are just people, too (at least so it seems in the game).
And lying about that seems rather understandable and reasonable.

Or did I miss something?
No, you didn't. Saskia is a good aligned character. If CDPROJEKT would have portrayed her as a "pure" character, as Kitako suggested, she would be out of place in The Witcher's world.

Besides, she had good reason to hide her true nature and which was pretty clear if Iorveth's path is followed.
avatar
Kitako: (...) Right when I though I had found a "pure" character is the bad bad world of the Witcher... bam, I find she's a liar, and all the "hero of the people aura" become meaningless.
avatar
K_Murx: Really? Why does that make her less "pure"? I mean, she's a dragon, alright... But dragons are just people, too (at least so it seems in the game).
And lying about that seems rather understandable and reasonable.

Or did I miss something?
Yes, lying is understandable, I totally simpatize with the character. But a farmer may not be so understanding. All the point of the Dragonslayer mith was to show that a simple peasant could challenge nobles and even kings... only that she wasn't a "simple peasant girl".

I was just overwhelmed when the person I tough more crystalline and "true" had a "little" secret to hide. And probably I love the character exactly for that. Before discovering her secret she was too onedimensional.

Also, she said she is into dwarves. More reasons to love her!
ehem....
thank you very much, the title of this post is a MAYOR SPOILER in itself....
Regarding Saskia, she was definitely one of the more positive character in the game. First of all, no one is perfectly good. See: Real World or every good books except LOTR. I kind of hate this trilogy for establishing one dimensional characters as fantasy cliche and praising them to be one of the best characters ever created in the history of literature.

Coming back to Saskia, well, she was a perfect mix of idealist and pragmatist. She knows that a person capable of inspiring others to support his or her cause and fight for it needs to be "mythicized", ergo people, especially common folks, need a hero. She was also enough reasonable to not overthrown Stennis and cause a hostility between the nobility and the third state. Finally, I love the fact that she wasn't vengeful after what Philippa did to her and was probably the one person who could silence her (before she was charmed by her, obviously). Phil was right - together they would be unstoppable. The power of lesbomancy would triumph over Nilfgaard anytime, anyday ;-) Generally speaking, I guess she will be alive in W3 and still a major player, probably the strongest positive female character in the game (I think Yennefer is going to be brainwashed by Nilfgaard and force to fight with Geralt).