Choice And Consequence

[Immortal]

*Minor Spoilers Ahead*


INB4 Decline or Witcher 3 Sucks / GOTY / Witcher 1 was better / I love Sawyer


This game despite all it's downsides and borderline edgy writing / biowaresque influences has really good CnC. Disagree? Fight me.

Almost every side quest I have done so far has had a choice in how I finish it that leads to either an immediate consequence (AKA Bioware Red / Blue Choice) or a far reaching consequence that actually has little to do with whether I made a good or evil choice.

A lot of your choices lead to consequences that really might be bad or good regardless of what decision you actually made, CnC in this game isn't really about Moral vs Immoral decisions but actually puts much more emphasis on Cause and Effect. You may prevent something bad happening in the immediate future that was within your control, only to have something happen later as a result that you didn't intend or want, that was just as bad or worse.

Sometimes the feeling that you actually have no control on what happens in the world creeps up, almost like the developers were plotting against you or were trying to be "omg edgy my good choice meant something bad happened"..

However, after watching a character swinging on a tree after committing suicide from an unintended decision I made in the game 4 hours earlier, I really realized that it was all kinda all clicking together. The things that were happening all made sense after the fact. I was almost forced to train myself to not view every decision the game gives me as Paragon or Renegade.. It was almost like.... the game wasn't fucking shit.

This starts to lead you to feeling that things are just out of your control sometimes but it's okay, you are a cog in the wheel, sometimes you can make a change and sometimes you can't and sometimes the change you wanted to make wasn't the one you wanted.

The best part for me - is it's not just a powerpoint presentation at the end of the game where it drones on about the future of every NPC with Generic Narrator Voice #4 (Looking at you Obsidian).. It actually has branching effect on the game while you play it.

You see these changes and how they affect the world as you play in that same world. It means quests might disappear, opportunities may close off. We don't have Biff The Understudy stepping in and filling the gaps. If someone important kicks it, you feel them missing from the world.

I am extremely impressed by this part of the game. I think it is one of the most detailed CnC games ever released. Call the writing shit, the combat shit, the setting ruined and the graphics downgraded. The CnC in this game is good.

If you have played the game and caught the parts where your decisions played out later down the line and still think this game is Witcher Age 3: Inquisition, you are being edgy or retarded.

 

[dragonul09]

Most of the time your choices are ''Alright,you can go away'' or ''I'm going to kill you''.That's how most of the quests are resolved in Velen,there are some exceptions from the black and white approach,but those exception are very meh.
The game has it's merits when it comes to characters,let's say that they feel ''real'' and most of them they have some nice witty lines...

The characters have a big plus from me but the world in general feels empty .

 

[Trash]

Yeah, always loved this in the Witcher games. Even the starting village has an early quest that seems straightforward only to turn ugly the instant you solve it the traditional way. Almost as a reminder that this is a Witcher game with the usual C&C. And then you keepp playing, keep seeing things happen and keep seeing consequences pop up from stuff done earlier. Splendid.

Then again, I'm not even moaning about the setting, graphics, open world and combat. I'm simply loving this game.

 

[Morkar Left]

Yeah, always loved this in the Witcher games. Even the starting village has an early quest that seems straightforward only to turn ugly the instant you solve it the traditional way. Almost as a reminder that this is a Witcher game with the usual C&C. And then you keepp playing, keep seeing things happen and keep seeing consequences pop up from stuff done earlier. Splendid.

Then again, I'm not even moaning about the setting, graphics, open world and combat. I'm simply loving this game.

I played W1 recently and I can't imagine what quest you mean. Care to explain with spoiler tag?

 

[dragonul09]

There's nothing like that in the first witcher.
http://witcher.wikia.com/wiki/The_Witcher_decision_checklist

 

[Trash]

The Witcher 1 had shitloads of C&C. Some of which reached rather far. It also had lots of outcomes in quests that (especially at the time) where rather novel. Instead of the usual black and white solutions, you now had genuine effects from your actions. Often with outcomes you wouldn't have expected or preferred. I really enjoyed that aspect in the original game. Glad to see that they've only improved upon it. That quest in the starting village really brought home the fact that the Witcher 3 is a Witcher game. Loved the introductionary feel of it. A tutorial if you like.

 

[Morkar Left]

I like that the choices have consequences later on. It's a nice touch. But the only not-sure option in the outskirts for me was the quest with the Scoia'tael. With all other options it was pretty obvious for me which was the right choice with a better outcome (usually the not-evil choice).

 

[baturinsky]

Was Sapkowski himself participating in writing? It sounds very much how he would write it.

 

[dragonul09]

Was Sapkowski himself participating in writing? It sounds very much how he would write it.

Nope,he even ''dislikes'' these games.

You can read about it here.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...r-of-the-witcher-books-thinks-about-the-games

He's very cold toward the witcher games or games in general it seems.

 

[Azarkon]

I think the best way to understand Witcher C&C is that they give you an impression of temporary control, only to take it away later in that classic "the road to hell is paved with great intentions" sort of way. Done wrong, it quickly becomes derp ex machina, because you're basically being a dick to your players, but Witcher 3 manages to strike a nice balance between completely random turnarounds and informed turnarounds. That is to say, you're given enough warning about a terrible decision to not make it. The example you gave illustrates this nicely:

Spoiler

You got the Baron-hangs-himself ending because you chose to free the tree spirit. You were, however, given several hints as to this being a bad idea:

1. The tree spirit was lying to you about being a druid who wanted to defeat the Crones. You found that out when Geralt remarks, "these don't look to be human bones," and by the fact that the spirit was not at all acting in a "human" way.
2. You knew that an old woman around the age of Anna was in charge of the children for the Crones. There's a decent shot that this is Anna given that she's the only woman that fits in Crookback Bog.
3. You knew the Baron was deeply in love with Anna, regardless of his actions, and is therefore going to take the loss very hard.
4. You knew the spirit only agreed to free the children, and that it being imprisoned by them in the first place shows that it doesn't have the power to deal with the Crones.
5. You knew that the old woman/Anna was very afraid of pissing off the Crones and losing track of the children.

To which end, the game gave you enough information to know that betraying the Crones and freeing the spirit is not going to have positive consequences for Anna's outcome. You're basically hoping for an overly optimistic outcome in which the spirit's intervention causes Anna to 'magically' be freed of her contract. But this is the Witcher world, and shit don't work that way - just as feeding the wounded woman Swallow 'healed' her wounds but made her a vegetable. Taking that risk, putting your faith in happily-ever-after endings, was your mistake, and you were punished for it.

 

[Hegel]

Yeah I should have predicted that those hags would have punished an innocent woman despite their knowledge of Geralt's betrayal (he literally confesses his backstabbing).

 

[Metro]

'C&C' in Witcher 1 was mostly cosmetic showing you a different storyboard 'cutscene' and didn't have much impact on the game itself. The only major decision was Order vs. Scoitel vs. 'neutral' and even then the action played out the same save who you fought/who you were teamed with at the end.

 

[Azarkon]

Yeah I should have predicted that those hags would have punished an innocent woman despite their knowledge of Geralt's betrayal (he literally confesses his backstabbing).

They also knew you were hired by the Baron to find Anna. Backstabbing the abductors in a hostage situation is just a bad idea on average. Imagine it was Ciri they were holding. Is Geralt still going to think, "why don't I just backstab her abductors? This is going to end well."

 

[Immortal]

Was Sapkowski himself participating in writing? It sounds very much how he would write it.

Nope,he even ''dislikes'' these games.

You can read about it here.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...r-of-the-witcher-books-thinks-about-the-games

He's very cold toward the witcher games or games in general it seems.

Yea but who gives a shit, He obviously didn't care enough about the integrity of his work to stop himself from whoring out the Witcher series to any TV Shows / Game Studio that was willing to pass him a few shekals.

Also every interview he does - he is quick to dismiss the games then talk about why people should buy his books.

You know when you have a hero or person you admire from a distance and then you learn more about them and suddenly your devotion for this person falters, you see the cracks in their persona, you fight it off, years of denial but eventually.. you realize they are just human waste like the rest of us. It's kinda like that for me - except I never admired Sapkowski.

Yeah I should have predicted that those hags would have punished an innocent woman despite their knowledge of Geralt's betrayal (he literally confesses his backstabbing).

I thought it was kinda cool that you were able to keep your deal with them while still fucking them over. They mention how you deceived them just like they have been deceiving people with ambiguous deals over the centuries.

Honestly the only reason I released the evil spikey tree sponge thing was because I wanted to see the hags get fucked over by something more evil then them. Still waiting to see how it pays out.

 

[Hegel]

Wait, didn't Geralt learn about Gran's identity in that last convo? I'm almost sure he does after seeing the geas on her palm.
Besides, he knows Ciri is not there and that demons can't break a promise once made.

 

[Perkel]

Nope,he even ''dislikes'' these games.

You can read about it here.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...r-of-the-witcher-books-thinks-about-the-games

He's very cold toward the witcher games or games in general it seems.

He don't play games and don't consider games cannon. Though he wrote Season of Storms as a part of short stories collection instead of continuation of novels.

 

[Perkel]

lol gamespot did video on that subject. Seems like rare case of general industry AAAA journos having same opinion as dex

It really seems like TW3 opened up some people minds that were overfed with bioware/betsheda/shittychooseyourownadventure shitty choices

 

[Paul_cz]

This game does narrative the best I have seen yet, in the AAA sphere at least.

 

[Jools]

You know when you have a hero or person you admire from a distance and then you learn more about them and suddenly your devotion for this person falters, you see the cracks in their persona, you fight it off, years of denial but eventually.. you realize they are just human waste like the rest of us. It's kinda like that for me - except I never admired Sapkowski.

I learnt long ago not to delve too deep into the personal lives, choices, opinions or personas of the people whose works of art I found great, inspiring, emotionally engaging. Because, indeed, guess what, turns out they have the same chances of being a ploughing cunt as your average human being do, said chances being very high at all times.

There are very few, rare, instances in which [author]==[nice person].

 

[Immortal]

You know when you have a hero or person you admire from a distance and then you learn more about them and suddenly your devotion for this person falters, you see the cracks in their persona, you fight it off, years of denial but eventually.. you realize they are just human waste like the rest of us. It's kinda like that for me - except I never admired Sapkowski.

I learnt long ago not to delve too deep into the personal lives, choices, opinions or personas of the people whose works of art I found great, inspiring, emotionally engaging. Because, indeed, guess what, turns out they have the same chances of being a ploughing cunt as your average human being do, said chances being very high at all times.

There are very few, rare, instances in which [author]==[nice person].

A few exceptions I have had a chance to experience are Bob Salvatore (Writer of the Drizzt Series) and to a lesser extent Ed Greenwood (Creator of Forgotten Realms).. I have had the chance to talk to both of them and they are incredibly nice / philanthropic.

But as you said, the exception, not the rule. Most talented authors are just horrible human beings in general. It takes a certain kind of special to be a writer I guess.

 

[Jools]

A few exceptions I have had a chance to experience are Bob Salvatore (Writer of the Drizzt Series)

That hurt. Well, kinda. I really don't like his stuff, but it's good to know he's a decent human being. :D

 

[Immortal]

A few exceptions I have had a chance to experience are Bob Salvatore (Writer of the Drizzt Series)

That hurt. Well, kinda. I really don't like his stuff, but it's good to know he's a decent human being. :D

I read the drizzt series when I was 12.. I wouldn't call his stuff a work of art although I do like some of his other non-Forgotten Realms series.

But yea, literature aside he is a really nice guy was my point. (He is also the creator of the Drow / Dark Elf Race for Forgotten Realms and I think he worked with Ed Greenwood to create the Dales / Northern Sword Coast area too)

Although Forgotten Realms is pretty shit post 4E

 

[Jools]

Although Forgotten Realms is pretty shit post 4E

I still like the settings. I stopped at 3.5, so not sure what 4E changed, in terms of lore and world. I occasionally still skim through the settings manual for ideas and inspiration.

 

[Immortal]

Although Forgotten Realms is pretty shit post 4E

I still like the settings. I stopped at 3.5, so not sure what 4E changed, in terms of lore and world. I occasionally still skim through the settings manual for ideas and inspiration.

Everything is destroyed.

Calimshan / Calimport are ruled by Djinn rulers and everyone else is a slave or killed (all lore books about customs / families / myths and folklore are now obsolete)
Mulhorand is Destroyed (Same issue as before)
Thay is Destroyed (Ruled by legions of undead)
Lantan.. Destroyed
Shade Enclave takes over Sembia, Then both are destroyed
Myth Drannor Destroyed

ect..

Years of developing these cultures and worlds and writing huge books on their back story and customs. WotC decided to have big EXPLOSHUNS wrecking everything, almost like a 14 year old seeing a huge castle made of lego and kicking it down so he can build his own version of the castle without using the existing instructions that made the castle so detailed and aesthetically pleasing, 10 minutes later he realizes it's kinda hard and walks away with some weird Frankenstein of crap half built, the left overs scattered around the room.

 

[Jools]

Although Forgotten Realms is pretty shit post 4E

I still like the settings. I stopped at 3.5, so not sure what 4E changed, in terms of lore and world. I occasionally still skim through the settings manual for ideas and inspiration.

Everything is destroyed.

Calimshan / Calimport are ruled by Djinn rulers and everyone else is a slave or killed (all lore books about customs / families / myths and folklore are now obsolete)
Mulhorand is Destroyed (Same issue as before)
Thay is Destroyed (Ruled by legions of undead)
Lanatan.. Destroyed
Shade Enclave takes over Sembia, Then both are destroyed
Myth Drannor Destroyed

ect..

Years of developing these cultures and worlds and writing huge books on their back story and customs. WotC decided to have big EXPLOSHUNS wrecking everything, almost like a 14 year old seeing a huge castle made of lego and kicking it down so he can build his own version of the castle without using the existing instructions that made the castle so detailed and aesthetically pleasing, 10 minutes later he realizes it's kinda hard and walks away with some weird Frankenstein of crap half built, the left overs scattered around the room.

One word:



Seriously, why? WTF? Did then ran out of paper, so they needed a way to make the new settings manual no more than 56 pages, and obliterating half the world was their best idea?