Grunker
RPG Codex Ghost
That much is true
If it's different enough and can stand on its own, why do you need the foundation? Why not make a game about some monster hunter - hardly a unique concept in RPGs.Raping the lore
People who accuse anything of "raping the lore" in any derivative works - be it films or games - are idiots. As long as the work can stand on its own, who cares if it aligns 1:1 with its foundation?
If it's different enough and can stand on its own, why do you need the foundation? Why not make a game about some monster hunter - hardly a unique concept in RPGs.Raping the lore
People who accuse anything of "raping the lore" in any derivative works - be it films or games - are idiots. As long as the work can stand on its own, who cares if it aligns 1:1 with its foundation?
2. Have the woman start looting the corpses as Geralt and Vesemir leave.
2. Have the woman start looting the corpses as Geralt and Vesemir leave.
Maybe she doesn't like to have people watching while she cooks. It's pretty bothersome. Totally cramps your style.
2. Have the woman start looting the corpses as Geralt and Vesemir leave.
Maybe she doesn't like to have people watching while she cooks. It's pretty bothersome. Totally cramps your style.
I don't know what your understanding of the word "looting" is, but it scares me.
2. Have the woman start looting the corpses as Geralt and Vesemir leave.
Maybe she doesn't like to have people watching while she cooks. It's pretty bothersome. Totally cramps your style.
I don't know what your understanding of the word "looting" is, but it scares me.
I think BC was refering to the accusal of cannibalism
Hey, she had a fair trial. She was duly sentenced and taken to be executed. Russky read her charges to her "murder of wounded, looting, cannibalism - sentenced to death by hanging or torment". And they carried out their sentence.OK so the girl is supposed to be a cannibal. Hmm, yeah, I'll take your word for it, russkies!
This is three blokes trying to do a good day's work to earn a living and they just get slaughtered by some random prick because he's a better swordsman and the women is attractive.
Where's the justice in that? Supposedly she's poor and desperate, just tyring to make a living. But then you're saying it's ok for a woman to kill, steal and eat human flesh if she's poor and desperate - but it's not ok for men to take a decent, honest job because they're poor and desperate too.
All this video does is reinforce sexist cultural stereotypes that men are evil and attractive women are innocent "damsel's in distress" that need to saved by sword wielding heroes.
Anita Sarkeesian would be most upset.
I agree with that. I mean, by medieval and even TWitcher (novels) standards these guys are on the level. That sergeant dude actually bothers to read the sentence, the blokes are not raping the woman, or anything - they try to execute justic and instill order in a war-torn region. Granted, they might be doing that for all the wrong reasons, but they do lack the sadistic glee about them which reflects positively upon them. I could understand the disdain the protagonist feels, but not what pushed him to murdering "honest" soldiers. That's why I said this scene is over the top and sensationalist nonsense - it takes the situation out of context and puts contemporary tropes ("oh a poor, attractive woman, abused by gruff blokes with the looks of russkie peasants") so that trailer has clear, relatable but ultimately shallow message behind it.
You mean Nilfgaardian justice? The justice of something that made more problems for Geralt and those he loves than all Northern Kingdoms combined.
Geralt of the books has impulses, I cant see any sensationalism and damsel in distress, in the books he reacts to a raped lass, despite claiming to never meddle, because he sees Ciri in her, he rescues Anguleme because she reminds him of Ciri, the Witcher2 showes teh "badass" Nilfgaardians down the players throat, and a very non-responsive Geralt that often doesn't question anything, ponder the idiocy of "Conspiracy Theory," in Witcher 2.
This is so back to the books that it's great. Raping the lore for the sake of user-oriented writing is a one way ticket to BiowEAr.
--------------------------------
Who cares about your shitty books?
Raping the lore
People who accuse anything of "raping the lore" in any derivative works - be it films or games - are idiots. As long as the work can stand on its own, who cares if it aligns 1:1 with its foundation?
The point is that this trailer sucks when it stands on its own, not that it doesn't live up to some arbitrary technical/content standards set by the books.
Quoting my name when calling me a idiot would have been better.
"my own Geralt."
The entitlement dictates that your Geralt is superior to mine or the posters above and bellow.
How much logic this contains is another thing, when reflecting on consistency , Golum the hairy footed hobit and Frodo the Golum would be a non- Lore
raping way apparently, because they are in a derivative work and contain Golums and Hobits.
The trailer explains Geralt, and the need to promote a game via trailers is by a land slide worse than the trailers execution.
Derivative works are defended when it fits the agenda.
Those that warned about the devolution of Shepard and Lore rape in ME2 got flak, those giving them flak whined when ME3 came out. And this isn't a even a derivative work, so it rapes it's own Lore.
Quoting my name when calling me a idiot would have been better.
I wasn't calling you an idiot. I was saying people who accuse works of "lore rape" were idiots. Decide for yourself whether that applies to you.
"my own Geralt."
The games do not let you play Geralt as you'd like. When they're at their best, the offer paths that are all within Geralt's character and let you pick.
In that way, they are much like Pen & Paper games where characters are prepared beforehand but you assume control. You are defined by the limits of the character but free to choose within those.
Geralt is not a blank slate with the capacity for puppy-bunny hurting or savoir-of-the-world white-knighting like a character in KotOR.
That's what I claimed above, and argued against shitting on established characters and events because something is a derivative work.
The popular demand goes from implementing a farming Geralt, over Geralt the crossbowman, to Geralt the cold "badass," or Geralt the thief, it lacks substance.
he's not however
a idiot that never questions the stupidity of the elves. The bro mentality of W2 fails at depicting that, Roche is even worse.
That's what I claimed above, and argued against shitting on established characters and events because something is a derivative work.
The popular demand goes from implementing a farming Geralt, over Geralt the crossbowman, to Geralt the cold "badass," or Geralt the thief, it lacks substance.
Iorweth, and despite my undying love for the games is nothing more than a mainstream attempt at Isengrim, does he deliver Isengrim?
No, it's just a attempt at "badass" elf, so when creating archetypes via derivative works sticking to the lore is a good idea.
Letho is not a book character, so it can be well done without being desperate. And Geralt may be forced into certain interactions in the books, he's not however
a idiot that never questions the stupidity of the elves. The bro mentality of W2 fails at depicting that, Roche is even worse.
_____________
'White Knight Geralt Who Saves The Innocent, Protects The Weak, And Has A Beard' is just as valid as, uhm, whomever the fuck Geralt is elsewhere.
That's what I claimed above, and argued against shitting on established characters and events because something is a derivative work.
It has nothing to do with shitting on established characters. It has something to with what kind of character the games establish Geralt as. Since they establish him as pretty much the same character as in the books, the games are best when the player's frame of decisions are within this established character's logical motives.
The popular demand goes from implementing a farming Geralt, over Geralt the crossbowman, to Geralt the cold "badass," or Geralt the thief, it lacks substance.
Which again isn't an issue with "lore rape" but of character consistency.
First of all; work on the bloody formatting and spelling of your posts, that one was barely decipherable.
So we are basically agreeing that the Biowarian "flexibility," has no place in the Witcher Universe , regardless how it's called?
If that's the case it needs more people thinking like you, otherwise I'm getting somewhat concerned with GoT references, Charles Dance being Emhyr's VA,
and other pop-culture shit that seems to slowly make it's way in to W3, just like LOTR did in W2.
----------------------------------
So we are basically agreeing that the Biowarian "flexibility," has no place in the Witcher Universe , regardless how it's called?
If that's the case it needs more people thinking like you, otherwise I'm getting somewhat concerned with GoT references, Charles Dance being Emhyr's VA,
and other pop-culture shit that seems to slowly make it's way in to W3, just like LOTR did in W2.
----------------------------------
Hmmm, to me W2 was much more of a Game of Thrones homage than W3 is shaping up to be. They said they'd tone down the politics.
Also, LOTR? Really?
It's fiction, dude. Who gives a fuck about whether or not the lore is raped or the characters are changed? If someone's so invested in a work of fiction as to worry about this kind of shit they need a therapist and a bleeping life.
That's what I claimed above, and argued against shitting on established characters and events because something is a derivative work.
It has nothing to do with shitting on established characters. It has something to with what kind of character the games establish Geralt as. Since they establish him as pretty much the same character as in the books, the games are best when the player's frame of decisions are within this established character's logical motives.
The popular demand goes from implementing a farming Geralt, over Geralt the crossbowman, to Geralt the cold "badass," or Geralt the thief, it lacks substance.
Which again isn't an issue with "lore rape" but of character consistency.
So we are basically agreeing that the Biowarian "flexibility," has no place in the Witcher Universe , regardless how it's called?
First of all; work on the bloody formatting and spelling of your posts, that one was barely decipherable.
The problem with acting like a pedantic dickhead is it exposes your own post to the same nitpicking:
Why not stick to the logic of their arguments rather than bitching about spelling,
which is petty, even for you.
So we are basically agreeing that the Biowarian "flexibility," has no place in the Witcher Universe , regardless how it's called?
If that's the case it needs more people thinking like you, otherwise I'm getting somewhat concerned with GoT references, Charles Dance being Emhyr's VA,
and other pop-culture shit that seems to slowly make it's way in to W3, just like LOTR did in W2.
----------------------------------
Hmmm, to me W2 was much more of a Game of Thrones homage than W3 is shaping up to be. They said they'd tone down the politics.
Also, LOTR? Really?
Did you miss the comments from the volcano thing to half of Iorweths narrative? I hate these kind of things, the games are perfectly able to create it's own humor without LOTR. These type of nods towards other media are nothing but annoying for me, I'm alone with that I know.
What's next?
"I like big boats and I cannot lie."
----------------