The Witcher: Sixteen Hours of Love

[Lightknight]

Is the point of this that sex in games is icky and people need to be more prudish and live by other people's values or is this just a joke to enjoy in passing as I'm enjoying it now?

A romantic relationship is an incredibly fast way to establish intimacy. He wasn't technically wrong. Portal had to stew that relationship for quite some time.

I think that they were saying that we need to be prudish, and live by other peoples value systems. Grey and Cory are both pretty infamous for hating sex, which is why Critical Miss never deals with it.

This is, of course, a ridiculous attitude. Sex is the best, most expedient way to show a relationship between two characters when you don't understand how human interaction works. I know that I never would have cared about Agro, from Shadow of the Colossus, if they hadn't included that intimate scene where Wander dry humps his leg.

They didn't say it was the best, most expedient way. They just said it was the quickest method to establish intimacy. And it is.

The point people should be making is that "quickest" often isn't the "best". A game that makes you grow to care about the characters in meaningful ways is far more interesting than the quick way (to most of us anyways). The developer wasn't wrong about the expedience of sex in developing intimacy, but in the real world we know that's a physical level sort of intimacy and not a deeper caring of a real relationship. A good example would be Ellie from The Last of Us. That relationship was developed through time and hardship. I can't imagine caring more about some character my avatar only slept with than I'd cared for Ellie who the avatar never touched.

So please understand, my contention here isn't regarding the value of non-sexual relationships. It's disappointment at completely missing what the developers were saying. Sex is fast, dialogue takes more time. It's true. But the response in the cartoon is a red-herring that other relationships can be meaningful too. Yes they are but that's not the point. The cartoon could have made their point with a qualitative distinction that sexual relationships are often shallow unless founded in more dynamic relationship background. But if their contention was that sex was used at all then that throws the logical approach out the window.

 

[Lightknight]

I'm not sure that caring about the companion cube was natural to the game rather than something we as a culture provided later. Did we view the companion cube as something more special due to some personification? Sure. But it wasn't as meaningful as a full relationship with a living being would have been.

Is the point of this that sex in games is icky and people need to be more prudish and live by other people's values or is this just a joke to enjoy in passing as I'm enjoying it now?

A romantic relationship is an incredibly fast way to establish intimacy. He wasn't technically wrong. Portal had to stew that relationship for quite some time.

I think there's a difference between- `I think what he said about this is dumb` and `sex is icky and we should all be prudes`, and it's kinda weird how everyone who wasn't impressed by what the guy said is getting lumped into the second category.

It's the go-to argument whenever people think a game's precious "maturity" is under-siege from them-evil-SJW-types. It's far easier to characterize critics as prudes (for the record, we had to edit a strip about two weeks due to, and I quote, "the definition of the labia and the butt cleavage") than address criticism of a particular approach.

They misconstrued what the developers said and decided instead that the developers were saying sex is the only way to establish a relationship. Only the frattiest of frat boys would think something like that (that it's the only way). Instead, they (the developers) made the claim that it establishes intimacy faster other methods which tends to be true since other methods require extra dialogue and experiential foundations that often take longer than dancing naked.

So why misconstrue such an obvious point? Why pretend like they were saying it was the only way and use an example like the companion cube that not only took in-game time to cultivate but also some gamer community involvement to reach the level of care it did. So I asked a question, do they feel like sex is bad? Why is what the developer said bad? If they said it was the only method to achieve intimacy then we could all have a good laugh at them. But this sort of straw-manning followed by the inevitable red-herring of proof is just weird.

I was unaware that these artists were SJWs. Seems like they're all over the place politically and it's fun to watch but makes the motivations difficult to ascertain. Which is why I asked if they were genuinely trying to make a point or just having a laugh. Jokes often don't need to be deconstructed, someone making a point does to understand the point more fully.

But yeah, sure, you can assume I was attacking the authors as SJW types if it makes you feel better to believe you're not dealing with someone who is actually thinking about what's being said. But I seriously doubt this failure to get the developer's point would have happened had their comment been about something other than sex which leads me to question whether or not sex itself was the issue here. If so, why? Prudishness is a legitimate motivation. If your assumption is that I was taking a stab against SJWs then perhaps that provides another motivation. That motivation to have sex with women is bad. Am I wrong about those options if it being about sex is the cornerstone of why it's being brought up? I mean, maybe it's just that the witcher developer was talking about his upcoming Elmo game and the writers thought that was inappropriate

Seeing as I just figured out that you are an author, perhaps you could shed some light on this. Is sex in games bad? Is a motivation that is very real in real life somehow bad to portray or not an extremely rapid method of motivation for a lot of people as to why they're going to pursue someone? I'd be very interested in your honest opinion. We can even take it to PM if you'd prefer. I'd be fascinated to have such a discussion with someone whose views differ so much from my own. I could learn a lot about your perspective if you have the time.

 

[Macsen Wledig]

I hate sex in video games, not because I'm a prude but because it's always so awkward and unrealistic. I feel it's only been slapped in to appease teenage boys who haven't worked out how to use the internet yet. It's always a case of just following a particular dialogue tree and then all of a sudden character #253421 will now fall madly in love with you. Congratulations! achievement "No longer a virgin" unlocked. Um, okay...

 

[mad825]

Geralt's a womanizer, Witchers are known to be sterile, he's got a body of marble, he loves Yennefer and has not seen her in a very long time. People have sex, they frequently do not need a very elaborate reason beyond just wanting to.

This is the "fastest" way to establish the relationship between Geralt and Yennefer without needing the player to go through Witcher 1 & 2 again.

lul wut?

Geralt has or had amnesia, it's really hard to have any devotion to a woman he cannot remember. In WT2, we see Geralt becoming more restraint as he loves Triss however towards the end of the game Geralt regains his memory and thus the relationship between triss is much more complicated especially when it appears that the sorcerers lodge is using Geralt to their own ends (TW1- triss and Eilhart cutscene hint hint).

In chapter 1 in TW2. You're given a choice to give your opinion on the Triss-Yennefer love triangle, you can say that you'll stay devoted to triss or things are "unsure". As such, casual flings are now a rarity.

 

[Fox12]

Is the point of this that sex in games is icky and people need to be more prudish and live by other people's values or is this just a joke to enjoy in passing as I'm enjoying it now?

A romantic relationship is an incredibly fast way to establish intimacy. He wasn't technically wrong. Portal had to stew that relationship for quite some time.

I think that they were saying that we need to be prudish, and live by other peoples value systems. Grey and Cory are both pretty infamous for hating sex, which is why Critical Miss never deals with it.

This is, of course, a ridiculous attitude. Sex is the best, most expedient way to show a relationship between two characters when you don't understand how human interaction works. I know that I never would have cared about Agro, from Shadow of the Colossus, if they hadn't included that intimate scene where Wander dry humps his leg.

They didn't say it was the best, most expedient way. They just said it was the quickest method to establish intimacy. And it is.

The point people should be making is that "quickest" often isn't the "best". A game that make you grow to care about the characters in meaningful ways is far more interesting than the quick way. The developer wasn't wrong about the expedience of sex in developing intimacy, but as we know in the real world that's a physical level sort of intimacy and not a deeper caring. A good example would be Ellie from The Last of Us. That relationship was developed through time and hardship. I can't imagine caring more about some character my avatar just boned than Ellie who the avatar never touched.

So please understand, my contention here isn't regarding the value of non-sexual relationships. It's disappointment at completely missing what the developers were saying. Sex is fast, dialogue takes more time. It's true. But the response isn't a red-herring that other relationships can be meaningful too. It should just be a qualitative distinction that sexual relationships are often shallow unless founded in more dynamic relationship background.

That's a fair point. I apologize for being testy. This discussion came up in another thread, and it basically devolved into calling everyone a prude, even if you were only criticizing the writing, and not the sex.

Personally, I think a few lines of well written dialogue is better then a sex scene, even in terms of expediency. Sex can mean many things. It could mean they love each other deeply, or it could mean they're two horny strangers who just met, or anything in the middle. Nothing wrong with any of that, of course, but it isn't the best way to establish character. This is especially true in The Witcher, where every story seems to start with Geralt in bed, even in the books. The problem is that he does this for many different reasons, most of which have nothing to do with love.

The way he phrased it made it sound like the primary/only reason a player would want to save her is because of the sex. That probably wasn't his intention, but it irked a lot of people, myself included. In terms of writing, CD Project pretty decent, but their understanding of sex has always rubbed me the wrong way.

*remembers sex cards from Witcher 1 and shudders.*

 

[Lightknight]

That's a fair point. I apologize for being testy. This discussion came up in another thread, and it basically devolved into calling everyone a prude, even if you were only criticizing the writing, and not the sex.

I was unaware of the other thread or that it devolved in such a way. I'm sorry you had to deal with that kind of environment where no one was being heard because so few were listening.

Personally, I think a few lines of well written dialogue is better then a sex scene, even in terms of expediency. Sex can mean many things. It could mean they love each other deeply, or it could mean they're two horny strangers who just met, or anything in the middle. Nothing wrong with any of that, of course, but it isn't the best way to establish character.

I fully agree. It is, by definition a physical and ergo shallow motivation.

This is especially true in The Witcher, where every story seems to start with Geralt in bed, even in the books. The problem is that he does this for many different reasons, most of which have nothing to do with love.

I'll take your word for it. I tried to play the Witcher 2 and didn't enjoy it enough to get much further than the past couple of levels. So I haven't picked up 3 despite the accolades since 2 was highly praised as well.

The way he phrased it made it sound like the primary/only reason a player would want to save her is because of the sex. That probably wasn't his intention, but it irked a lot of people, myself included. In terms of writing, CD Project pretty decent, but their understanding of sex has always rubbed me the wrong way.

*remembers sex cards from Witcher 1 and shudders.*

I can understand that. He was trying to say that the player needs a motivation and that sex is hell-a fast and easy to implement. But I can understand if it was read in another manner. It would just be ridiculous to assume that anyone would think that sex is the only actual motivation possibly existent in story mechanics. So I'd hope anyone that took it that way would stop to consider who would even say that before rereading the quote. In this case, he said two things. Sex is a quick motivator to justify pursuit of the character was the first. Then he stated that you can't just tell players to and you can't just tell players to find someone they essentially aren't motivated to find.

If that was read as them saying that the only possible method of motivating players is just sex, then it's a fairly blatant misunderstanding and this article appears to be based on it. So my original post in here was to question the why of it? Was it purposefully misconstrued to tell a joke (which I found funny)? Or were the comments read through tinted glasses reflecting some other motivation. Prudishness, dislike of Gerault's conquests, stuff like that. Questions the writers would know but I wouldn't because I don't know them beyond their excellent work here.

*remembers sex cards from Witcher 1 and shudders.*

As a full grown married man I also generally dislike sex in games. It is generally needless and completely misses me as a target market.

I think Mass Effect did it in a far more meaningful way that didn't make me feel like a dirty little boy. I'd love to see games take a swing at that caliber of relationship if they're going to include it at all. I understand that even porn games have a right to exist but I'd appreciate actual developed relationships in my AAA titles if it's going to happen. But the mass effect example certainly wasn't a "quick and easy" motivator. The dialogue resulted in sex as a natural result of a budding intimate and romantic relationship rather than a fleeting one nighter of some kind.

 

[IceForce]

You really shouldn't smoke in bed. It's a fire hazard.

 

[Lightknight]

You really shouldn't smoke in bed. It's a fire hazard.

Not after the companion cube gets done with it... (that is to say, the bed being moist, thanks to the companion cube's elaborate activities, is no longer a hazard for fire)

 

[Popido]

Witcher 2 starts with Triss in the bed, so this is just continuity to that.

Its up to see how the scene plays out in the game. Knowning the series, the third game is going to offer choice for the player to choose to pursue either Yennifer or Triss. And Triss has the advance of being in the series since beginning. People who haven't read the books will have less interest for Yennifer. It is likely they chose to start with sex scene to have Geralt act more, vulnerable. You pursue after her, found her and then you two had sex. After that, she should be off again. Perhaps they want the player to question if they're still in love? Just changing words would probably not be enough or vague enough.

There needs to be a choice. If Yennifer clearly shows that she cares for Geralt, then Triss path is cheating on her. If nothing happens between Yennifer and Geralt, most players will continue to pursue her for an answer. Sex leaves it vague enough for that.

Well, I don't think we know yet to decide if the solution is justified. Nor is it really that big of an deal when the second game already started with Triss in bed.

If you want to compare this to Companion Cubes, imagine that Portal 3(hahahaha) has a point where you have to choose between little burned Companion Cube from Portal 1 and the newer model of Companion Cube from Portal 2. Although, it was implied at the ending to be THE Companion Cube.

 

[SNCommand]

Nothing wrong with in game sex, but it does absolutely nothing for me, if I wanted to see it there's an entire medium devoted to it available on the internet

Personally I would say the strongest relationship I've had with characters in the game was that of Joel and Ellie in Last of Us, they felt like real people, I wanted them to be real people, their relationship felt genuine, and it made it easier for me as the player to form a relationship to them

 

[tzimize]

It's funny because in the first Witcher game, the player could fuck random women left and right, and it never became "a justification for the player to pursue the woman".

It was literally wham-bam-thankyou-ma'am, and you never saw them again.

Which I enjoyed immensely. Never have women felt so much like conquests. The cards were just the icing on the cake. I do however appreciate the more serious tone of W2. And I have to repeat my opinion that The start of W2 when Geralt wakes up in bed with Triss is one of the best scenes in a game I have EVER seen.

The woman is treated like the sexual and beautiful creature she is. She is not a slut or a prostitute, she is of equal standing with Geralt. A partner. It is also very sensually made.

The scene in the elven baths in W2 was also very nice. And its so thrilling to see this medium be used to portrait adult relationships.

If there is more like this in W3 I welcome it, and if there are some optional conquests to be made, thats fine as well. My Geralt is kind of a slut. Sometimes you just have to scratch that itch, and its not like he has any bastards to worry about being sterile and all.

Nothing wrong with in game sex, but it does absolutely nothing for me, if I wanted to see it there's an entire medium devoted to it available on the internet

Personally I would say the strongest relationship I've had with characters in the game was that of Joel and Ellie in Last of Us, they felt like real people, I wanted them to be real people, their relationship felt genuine, and it made it easier for me as the player to form a relationship to them

I think one of the strongest relationships I've had with a game character is Tali. Her voice acting was SUPERB, and her grief when she found her father dead stayed with me long afterwards.

Other than that there is a fantastic romantic sideplot in a very old and rather obscure Blue Byte game called Albion (one of my all time favorite games). Two of the NPCs fall in love, one is dumb, the other is a....er...cat-alien suspiciously similar to the Avatar cat people (only not blue). The sideplot is completely beyond the players control and it is both subtle and beautifully written. No kinky scenes though.

Romance and sex would be welcome in more games as long as the developers treat their audience as something more than a horny 14 year old :|

 

[Piorn]

I won't bother with women in the Witcher ever again!
In 1 they were nothing but trouble, that witch in that village, and all the other were either of no consequence or more trouble than they're worth.
I rescued that useless hack Triss in 2, and look what it brought me in the end, dragon got away.
Actually I won't trust anyone ever again, that Prince guy seemed cool enough and then bam, he's crowned himself king just because I demanded a fair trial.
Can't trust anyone but yourself.

Also, not a fan of sex in AAA games. I either want to play or spank it, and sex scenes in games are never suited for that. In fact they're suited for neither. It's ALWAYS just a 1min cutscene, maybe with quicktime events, but nothing that would qualify it as either porn or a game.

 

[CaitSeith]

A lot of sites have been eronously reporting that The Witcher 3 will feature sixteen hours of virtual rumpy pumpy. Sadly, this is not true.

I almost sense that a tear was shed when the word "sadly" was being typed.

 

[CaitSeith]

I'm not sure that caring about the companion cube was natural to the game rather than something we as a culture provided later.

Well, the in-game developers' commentaries mentioned the cube attachment from the game-testers. It wasn't natural, but the result of level design intended to encourage the attachment.

 

[Scorpid]

No amount of quotes with dubious gender politics will make the fucking companion cube even a half way decent character. Take the Valve fanboyism and go home.

Uhhh relax. Its not a character. Its quite obviously a object that was used as a joke.

 

[Abomination]

Geralt's a womanizer, Witchers are known to be sterile, he's got a body of marble, he loves Yennefer and has not seen her in a very long time. People have sex, they frequently do not need a very elaborate reason beyond just wanting to.

This is the "fastest" way to establish the relationship between Geralt and Yennefer without needing the player to go through Witcher 1 & 2 again.

lul wut?

Geralt has or had amnesia, it's really hard to have any devotion to a woman he cannot remember. In WT2, we see Geralt becoming more restraint as he loves Triss however towards the end of the game Geralt regains his memory and thus the relationship between triss is much more complicated especially when it appears that the sorcerers lodge is using Geralt to their own ends (TW1- triss and Eilhart cutscene hint hint).

In chapter 1 in TW2. You're given a choice to give your opinion on the Triss-Yennefer love triangle, you can say that you'll stay devoted to triss or things are "unsure". As such, casual flings are now a rarity.

had amnesia

Geralt regains his memory

This is a love TRIANGLE in almost every sense of the word. Geralt loves Triss AND Yennefer - and he bangs them both.

Witchers are aberrations, they do not function in society like others and neither so sorcerers. I believe they're not allowed to take lands or title and Witchers can't reproduct so the concept of marriage - and in turn monogamy - is pointless to them.

If you haven't seen the love of your life in years and you're already a very sexual person you're gonna want their and your clothes off as fast as possible. Lazy writing? More like logical writing.

 

[The Wooster]

Seeing as I just figured out that you are an author, perhaps you could shed some light on this. Is sex in games bad? Is a motivation that is very real in real life somehow bad to portray or not an extremely rapid method of motivation for a lot of people as to why they're going to pursue someone? I'd be very interested in your honest opinion. We can even take it to PM if you'd prefer. I'd be fascinated to have such a discussion with someone whose views differ so much from my own. I could learn a lot about your perspective if you have the time.

There's a blurb beneath the comic that answers all of these questions.

 

[Lightknight]

Seeing as I just figured out that you are an author, perhaps you could shed some light on this. Is sex in games bad? Is a motivation that is very real in real life somehow bad to portray or not an extremely rapid method of motivation for a lot of people as to why they're going to pursue someone? I'd be very interested in your honest opinion. We can even take it to PM if you'd prefer. I'd be fascinated to have such a discussion with someone whose views differ so much from my own. I could learn a lot about your perspective if you have the time.

There's a blurb beneath the comic that answers all of these questions.

Ah, excellent blurb.

If your disagreement is just qualitative, that dialogue is a more rewarding method for building relationships and making the player care about the characters, then that's completely in line with what I believe. I understand if you just misconstrued what they said as being the "only motivation" for the point of the comic even if they clearly weren't saying that. I assume you are aware that's not what they were saying and instead wanted to use it to discuss a topic I really agree with. That while sex is an easy motivation, it is a shallow one. I'd posit that to be true both in works of fiction and in real life.

I absolutely love your work, thank you for taking the time to respond.

 

[Schadrach]

It's funny because in the first Witcher game, the player could fuck random women left and right, and it never became "a justification for the player to pursue the woman".

It was literally wham-bam-thankyou-ma'am, and you never saw them again.

The thing I think everyone keeps missing (or trying to ignore) is that the woman in question (Yennefer de Vergerberg, introduced in "The Last Wish", I believe?) was introduced in the books. She and Geralt have something of a lengthy history. I imagine from their perspective it's a succinct way to show that they're involved without having to include a lot of exposition that will be entirely redundant to fans of the books while still getting the gist across to people who aren't familiar with the books.

I can't wait for the gender complaining folks to turn an eye to Ciri (the female witcher character). You know why she was trained as a witcher? Because she was promised to Geralt in "A Question of Price." She's also inherently not as capable a fighter as a "real" witcher because while she was put through the training she wasn't put through the special diet or the trial of the grasses (because they both weren't sure what it would do to her [given that the effects include hormonal manipulation and they'd literally never done it to a woman before], and being technically the rightful heir of the royal line of Cintra would mean that the sterility that results would be less than ideal).