The Witcher The Witcher IV - The Ciri Saga Begins

[Harthwain]

Says he really liked the trailer and he doesn't think there's anything particularly wrong with her looks.

He says "there truly is something about Ciri that feels a little off to me in the trailer" (including "her slightly altered apperance"). So he agrees about the uncanny valley effect (and blames this on a combination of factors). He is just not wording it as strongly as a lot of people.

He also thinks CDPR was right for not picking Geralt as the protagonist for Witcher 4.

And...? That wasn't really the point of contention for most people, was it?

Also thinks Ciri being the protagonist is fine if CDPR has a well-thought story in mind.

He literally says, and I quote; "[...] lots of types of main characters can work if done properly and I firmly disagree that Ciri is necessarily better than, say, the nameless viking-looking girl from the School of the Lynx who kind of looks like Ciri". Also, most of the video is about why using Ciri as the protagonist is a very questionable decision (by the guy and objectively speaking).

So, no, he doesn't really think that Ciri as the protagonist is fine. His point is that most characters can work as a protagonist if it is done in a proper way and the blank slate would actually be his preferred option.

Doesn't mind a female protagonist Witcher game if she's as well written as Meve.

Most people probably wouldn't mind having a female protagonist per se (especially if such character was well written). People mind having a female witcher as a protagonist (and Ciri in particular). This is an important distinction.

 

[Vincente]

That wasn't really the point of contention for most people, was it?

Have you read this thread?

 

[Harthwain]

That wasn't really the point of contention for most people, was it?

Have you read this thread?

I did. Most people are against Ciri as the protagonist (which is not the same as wanting Geralt to be the protagonist again). Some don't like CDPR chickening out and not doing a fresh witcher/blank slate. Somebody said Eskel would be better than Geralt. Zebrowski is mentioned as "far more interested than game Geralt in the face" (so it is more "you could make a better witcher than Geralt" kind of statement than anything else). There is a whole bunch of discussing how Geralt was in the books or somesuch. One guy (BruceVC) is "not happy with how Geralt is no longer the main protagonist". Aaaand... That's it. One dude. Even I said that Geralt was fine as the protagonist of the series, but never said CDPR should bring him back. So what am I missing?

 

[Vincente]

You're being genuinely dishonest if you're pretending to not see the "they're replacing Geralt!" talk people had pages ago and how they were distraught by that fact, but sure lol

 

[Lyric Suite]

Look we all knew it's gonna be woke slop. The older devs were basically libtards already but compared to modern nu-devs they might well staunch right-wingers.

There's no hope for this but be a turd.

 

[Tyrr]

Who would have thought that calling CDPR the "new Bioware" many years ago wasn't a compliment, but a warning?
Just wait a another few years and you will see paid shills calling the newest Witcher or CP2077 slop "return to form".

 

[Harthwain]

You're being genuinely dishonest if you're pretending to not see the "they're replacing Geralt!" talk people had pages ago and how they were distraught by that fact, but sure lol

Are you genuinely dishonest yourself or just aren't good at reading English? Because I can bet the issue wasn't "they're replacing Geralt!". It was likely more "Ciri is not a good replacement for Geralt". Hell, even I said as much. But please do provide a link, so I can tear apart your claim, just as I tore apart your poor understanding of what the xLetalis guy in the YouTube video said.

 

[Semiurge]

Unsurprisingly, ryżer doesn't know that an unflattering light and facial expression can make any woman look ugly.

Imagine coping and shilling so hard.

Its an abomination, and they made her ugly on purpose, stop running defense for a product you fucking retard.

Don't throw around the word 'abomination' so lightly. She's a beauty compared to what's in other recent games.

 

[MasPingon]

You're being genuinely dishonest if you're pretending to not see the "they're replacing Geralt!" talk people had pages ago and how they were distraught by that fact, but sure lol

Are you genuinely dishonest yourself or just aren't good at reading English? Because I can bet the issue wasn't "they're replacing Geralt!". It was likely more "Ciri is not a good replacement for Geralt". Hell, even I said as much. But please do provide a link, so I can tear apart your claim, just as I tore apart your poor understanding of what the xLetalis guy in the YouTube video said.

You are both not good at reading. Geralt is THE Witcher, that's what Sapkowski intended with this title. Everything that happens in books we see through his lens. There is a reason why Sapkowski wrote another 2 The Witcher books after the Saga final with Geralt, not Ciri, as protagonist, even tho he died at the end. It might shock you, but the reason is The Witcher is Geralt. There are other witchers, there are sorcerers,kings, there is child of Elder Blood, but he is The Witcher. Just like there are a lot of barbarians but there is one Conan THE barbarian. It's beyond retarded that there are people that don't get it.

You want to make Ciri protagonist, fine. Then call it something like The Witcher Saga:Lady of Time and Space. That's how you differenciate it from the main story Arc with respect for fans and source material. They've already succesfully done that with The Witcher Tales. But not now, because now it's not to entertain us, it's to make a statement.

 

[Lagole Gon]

This is like veilguard all over again...!

 

[Harthwain]

You are both not good at reading. Geralt is THE Witcher, that's what Sapkowski intended with this title. Everything that happens in books we see through his lens. There is a reason why Sapkowski wrote another 2 The Witcher books after the Saga final with Geralt, not Ciri, as protagonist, even tho he died at the end. It might shock you, but the reason is The Witcher is Geralt. There are other witchers, there are sorcerers,kings, there is child of Elder Blood, but he is The Witcher. Just like there are a lot of barbarians but there is one Conan the barbarian. It's beyond retarded that there are people that don't get it.

Don't try to be Sherlock when you didn't even do your homework.

While Geralt is the titular witcher of the books, he is not the only witcher in the universe, nor was he originally intended to be the protagonist in the first game. The early concept was to use a blank slate for the protagonist of the game and the few screenshots showed some dude with a short Gotrek-like red-haired mohawk. This was featured in a gaming magazine and it was before times when you could find everything on the Internet, so I doubt it is possible to find now. Especially when you have a planty of stuff from the games flooding the search results. This was later changed to Geralt. That's why the first game has the witcher medallion from the Wolf School on the cover, instead of Geralt himself (unlike the latter two):

So? I am skeptical they have a good explanation. Just as I am not buying their bullshit that they always intended Ciri to be the main character of the series. I mean, these covers should make it obvious who the real main character of the series was:

Spoiler

You want to make Ciri protagonist, fine. Then call it something like The Witcher Saga:Lady of Time and Space. That's how you differenciate it form the main story Arc with respect for fans and source material. They've already succesfully done that with The Witcher Tales. But not now, because now it's not to entertain us, it's to make a statement.

They're being desperate is what this is. After Cyberpunk 2077 they don't trust themselves with creating a good narrative with a blank-slate witcher. That's why they are using Ciri and The Witcher brand as the continuation of sorts. It's their attempt to Return to Form™.

 

[Bulo]

You want to make Ciri protagonist, fine

Ciri has already been the protagonist, you fucking subhuman. READ THE BOOKS

 

[Harthwain]

Hallelujah, I managed to find some video proof of early The Witcher game via some Reddit post (KefkaFollower):

"As you can probably see, the main protagonist is not Geralt [...] Players were supposed to create their own witchers [...] Geralt appeared in the story, but only as the non-player character":


Here is the look of the "custom witcher" that I saw in the magazine (I misremembered the haircut):


They also planned to make a female witcher:


Hopefully this is the final nail to the coffin of the story where The Witcher was supposedly always Geralt.

 

[MasPingon]

You are both not good at reading. Geralt is THE Witcher, that's what Sapkowski intended with this title. Everything that happens in books we see through his lens. There is a reason why Sapkowski wrote another 2 The Witcher books after the Saga final with Geralt, not Ciri, as protagonist, even tho he died at the end. It might shock you, but the reason is The Witcher is Geralt. There are other witchers, there are sorcerers,kings, there is child of Elder Blood, but he is The Witcher. Just like there are a lot of barbarians but there is one Conan the barbarian. It's beyond retarded that there are people that don't get it.

Don't try to be Sherlock when you didn't even do your homework.

While Geralt is the titular witcher of the books, he is not the only witcher in the universe, nor was he originally intended to be the protagonist in the first game. The early concept was to use a blank slate for the protagonist of the game and the few screenshots showed some dude with a short Gotrek-like red-haired mohawk. This was featured in a gaming magazine and it was before times when you could find everything on the Internet, so I doubt it is possible to find now. Especially when you have a planty of stuff from the games flooding the search results. This was later changed to Geralt. That's why the first game has the witcher medallion from the Wolf School on the cover, instead of Geralt himself (unlike the latter two):

So? I am skeptical they have a good explanation. Just as I am not buying their bullshit that they always intended Ciri to be the main character of the series. I mean, these covers should make it obvious who the real main character of the series was:

Spoiler

You want to make Ciri protagonist, fine. Then call it something like The Witcher Saga:Lady of Time and Space. That's how you differenciate it form the main story Arc with respect for fans and source material. They've already succesfully done that with The Witcher Tales. But not now, because now it's not to entertain us, it's to make a statement.

They're being desperate is what this is. After Cyberpunk 2077 they don't trust themselves with creating a good narrative with a blank-slate witcher. That's why they are using Ciri and The Witcher brand as the continuation of sorts. It's their attempt to Return to Form™.

You've failed reading comprehension check. That's exactly why old CDPR back in 2005 changed protagonist to Geralt, they knew it's a stupid idea to make The Witcher game without THE Witcher. It just wouldn't work. Back then nobody gave a fuck about red-haired guy with a sword and game with The Witcher title, for god knows why reason. Everyone was like - ok, but what does it have to do with Geralt? So they have decided to bring Geralt back, even tho it was a bit stupid, considering he was dead. That's when the game got it's momentum, everyone(including me) just turned a blind eye to retarded amnesia trope, because The Witcher was back.

V wasn't blank state character, he got his personality and purpose. It wasn't as multi-layered and defined character as Geralt, but still not blank.

 

[Harthwain]

You've failed reading comprehension check. That's exactly why old CDPR back in 2005 changed protagonist to Geralt, they knew it's a stupid idea to make The Witcher game without THE Witcher.

Nice try, but not good enough. The game was always called The Witcher, even when you could create your custom witcher. That was the point of the title - the player was supposed to be the titular witcher (and is also the reason for the only cover in the series not featuring Geralt, as I explained before). Why was this changed later doesn't really matter, because it doesn't change anything nor does it contradict the point about having The Witcher game without Geralt. But whatever helps you sleep at night, Mr Reading Comprehension Check.

 

[MasPingon]

You've failed reading comprehension check. That's exactly why old CDPR back in 2005 changed protagonist to Geralt, they knew it's a stupid idea to make The Witcher game without THE Witcher.

Nice try, but not good enough. The game was always called The Witcher, even when you could create your custom witcher. That was the point of the title - the player was supposed to be the titular witcher

You can't just focus solely on first iteration of a game, especially since those guys working at CDPR back then didn't exactly knew what they were doing at first, it was all new to them. The Witcher is a title of book series, THE Witcher is Geralt. You can't seperate those two mediums and say - I just take a title and I will get rid of it's meaning. They thought it over and changed it, so it makes more sense. That was a smart decision resulting from gaining knowladge about Sapkowski's work.

 

[Inec0rn]

I mean this is a company looking for a big safe payday and the brand alone should pretty much guarantee success unless they self sabotage it.

That said, personally I don't want to play as some game writers insert character / mary sue or even make my own character make believe in a Witcher universe. I want to play as Geralt with a competently written story by the author that can actually write. Kind of like the last 3 games that were enjoyable, If that story is finished then fuck no I don't want yet another openworld Mary Sue generic fantasy game, we have plenty of them already and they are shit.

 

[Lhynn]

Lhynn should post wife/gf pics for judgement me thinks.

What the fuck is this shit? Are you some sort of karen in real life?
Did you drop your balls somewhere?

I heard this theory that around half the codex is bored housewives larping as rpg fans and I believe it more with every passing moment in this thread.
"That shes old and ugly is realistic you chud!" "All the women here are 10/10 you bigot."

Fuck off. You think I give a shit about your scorn and your ratings? They feed me, I love watching you squirm trying to justify and shill for the abomination, it tells me who you really are as a person.

 

[*-*/\--/\~]

Why is it called the Witcher if Cirilla is the protagonist? Shouldn't it be called the Witch?

Witches? Witcheress? Witcheresses?

Why complicate things? Just use Bitcher.

Bitch: her

Also it will be pozzed as hell, their talent went off to found Rebel Wolves and they're left with activists and troons.

 

[Skinwalker]

In the new novel from Sapkowski (Crossroad of Crows)

No one cares, it's non-canon.

 

[Harthwain]

You can't just focus solely on first iteration of a game, especially since those guys working at CDPR back then didn't exactly knew what they were doing at first, it was all new to them. The Witcher is a title of book series, THE Witcher is Geralt. You can't seperate those two mediums and say - I just take a title and I will get rid of it's meaning.

"Get rid of it's meaning"? The meaning of words can be open to interpretation. You think CDPR didn't know The Witcher was "a title of book series" and "THE Witcher is Geralt" BEFORE they started working on their game? They knew all that, and yet they still went with their idea of a blank slate for The Witcher 1. You say I "can't separate those two mediums", but I wasn't the one who did it: CDPR was. They took the title. They took the iconography. The universe. The profession. They created Geralt as a non-playable character the player-witcher could meet.

About "THE Witcher". As far as I am aware "The" in "The Witcher" is a result of troubled translation process (and the first translation into English wasn't great, which is probably why series didn't catch on before the success of the games). Because originally it was intended to be simply "Witcher", but that word alone could be easily misunderstood as "someone who creates witches", so they added "the" and it ended up as "The Witcher" as a result. Not to denote Geralt as the main character. By the way, going along with your barbarian analogy the title should have been Geralt the Witcher, just as we have Conan the Barbarian (or Conan the Cimmerian), not The Barbarian, even if now we associate Conan as the model for a barbarian.

 

[Lyric Suite]

I'm at the fifth story, the one about the elves.

So far i'd say Geralt as "The Witcher" is actually secondary to the philosophy this series seems to be tackling, some kind of contrast between determinism and free will.

Geralt himself is mostly a particular point of view or perspective, likely the author's own, kinda like Conan was just an extension of Howard's own perspective.

I don't see anything in this that makes Geralt himself necessary.

 

[moon knight]

"[...] lots of types of main characters can work if done properly and I firmly disagree that Ciri is necessarily better than, say, the nameless viking-looking girl from the School of the Lynx who kind of looks like Ciri"

It depends on what the narrative is. If the narrative is centered around elements of Ciri's backstory, then no.

 

[moon knight]

Geralt is THE Witcher, that's what Sapkowski intended with this title.

You are retarded, The Witcher as the title of the series is an invention of CDPR, Sapkowski never used the title Wiedzmin except for his first ever story

 

[moon knight]

I'm at the fifth story, the one about the elves.

So far i'd say Geralt as "The Witcher" is actually secondary to the philosophy this series seems to tackling, some kind of contrast between determinism and free will.

Geralt himself is mostly a particular point of view or perspective, likely the author's own, kinda like Conan was just an extension of Howard's own perspective.

I don't see anything in this that makes Geralt himself necessary.

Yes, "witcher" is just a low paid job for the main character, the saga isn't about monster hunting