What did you all think of the Witcher 3?

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

I guess this isn?t all that surprising. [https://www.engadget.com/amp/2019/08/30/cyberpunk-developer-will-keep-making-witcher-games/] We can only hope the series moves forward in a meaningful way, and only when the time is right.

Hmmm, the issue is that the combination of the main game and the Blood and Wine DLC ended it in such a definite way that it's going to be hard for the story not to feel forced. But saying that, Geralt died at the end of the books and that didn't stop them making the games (non-canon) sequels.

It's only an issue if they plan to stick to Geralt as main protagonist. Which they aren't.

Who will be then? It doesn't explicitly say they won't use Geralt on that link in the post.

Ciri. Or some other witcher, maybe a custom character.
They're not denouncing anything, cause the game isn't likely even developed yet, and lots can change, HOWEVER after Geralt getting his ending twice, i'd safely bet on them giving him a rest, from being the main protag again.

 

[Bilious Green_v1legacy]

Extraordinary game. While it has its faults in its combat and mechanics, the sheer level of quality that it manages to maintain over its 100+hr duration is exceptional. I can honestly say its the only game I have ever played full price for day one, and felt that I ripped the developers off based on the amount of quality content I got for what I paid.

 

[dscross]

I haven?t read the books or even finished 3 yet, but I?ve heard the games kinda pick up after the books, and in the original Geralt is discovered practically dead in a ditch and *brought back to life*.

That's true, but he's definitely dead in the books. The games are a continuation of it for game's sake but the author has said his last book is the canon ending.

In that case it?s pretty amazing CD Projekt have managed to expand this tale so far and well. Think of all the stories that would?ve never been if it was just left as the books ended things. I?m also curious as to where they?re taking the Netflix series.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

apparently Geralt was dead for reals in the final book

Yes and no. That part is intentionally left to interpretation. Possibly because Sapkowski actually wanted to write a sequel but was dissuaded after the first game was released. Anyway, you need to decide if Ciri was telling the truth about what happened with Geralt and Yen. If she was, then Geralt and Yen died, but Ciri revived them. Unlike Yennever and other sorceresses, she can do that. That's pretty much why CDPR didn't have a lot of trouble figuring out a way to bring him back with amnesia.

 

[dscross]

apparently Geralt was dead for reals in the final book

Yes and no. That part is intentionally left to interpretation. Possibly because Sapkowski actually wanted to write a sequel but was dissuaded after the first game was released. Anyway, you need to decide if Ciri was telling the truth about what happened with Geralt and Yen. If she was, then Geralt and Yen died, but Ciri revived them. Unlike Yennever and other sorceresses, she can do that. That's pretty much why CDPR didn't have a lot of trouble figuring out a way to bring him back with amnesia.

Interestingly enough, that?s pretty much my designated excuse for every sequel that has you re-leveling Geralt?s skill trees when he?s already a Master Witcher; at least narratively speaking. That and perhaps somewhat in conjunction with the idea that his baseline stats in sequels just pick up where the last game left off, so he just keeps getting better.

*Because game continuity meets playability is always a bit awkward*