Witcher - Geralt Almost Wasn't the Main Character

[Mark0]

As someone who's never read the books I'm glad they crafted Geralt as they did. As a video game character he's one of my faves.

I meant in the third Witcher only. On the other two he shows more or less the same inclinations of the literary Geralt. Still, it's a question of taste, I didn't like the fact they turned the character too obsessed with his personal life in the third game and also that they put aside racial conflicts and social/ political matters.

 

[Myrthos]

Anyways you are free to make your own games you know, that way you would get exactly what you want in a game.

Let us use these words whenever someone on this site makes a negative comment on a game. They are so constructive. They are in the same league with, if you don't like this site you can go somewhere else. Also, such a constructive statement.

 

[mazur49]

Leo Bonhart. If they can make Leo a new protagonist that would be a brilliant trick.

 

[Aubrielle]

Let us use these words whenever someone on this site makes a negative comment on a game. They are so constructive. They are in the same league with, if you don't like this site you can go somewhere else. Also, such a constructive statement.

I dunno, Myrthos. We have a few members that absolutely hate it here, and yet they stay. "If you don't like it, you can leave" seems applicable to some people, at least…

 

[CelticFrost]

Let us use these words whenever someone on this site makes a negative comment on a game. They are so constructive. They are in the same league with, if you don't like this site you can go somewhere else. Also, such a constructive statement.

But I do like this site, I don't remember every saying other wise. But more to the point the person in question doesn't like the character in the game and wishes they could have made their own to suit their needs.

They also had said there were way to many games that don't let you make your own character. I simple pointed out a few of the most talked games that do let you. I personally haven't played many that don't.

Then something about me pointing out a few games and how the character in the game is not very likable to them and no counter points to RPG's that force you to use a made character.

Though if pointing out they could make a game to their liking is not liking it here, I didn't understand that and will reframe from saying that any more as I do like it here and everyone here.

I think this site has the best group of people with a lot of good back and forth about everything.

 

[wolfgrimdark]

... with today's voice acting, animations improvements and generally higher quality of writing, "create your own character" can't compete when it comes to characterization and you sometimes ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6PUReOuHVw

This is incredibly subjective. "Can't compete" Says who? You? Other people who like games that are like watching a movie? Sure in that case, yes.

But don't go lumping everyone into your opinion on what can't compete. There are many gamers who feel the opposite. In fact one could just as easily say games with linear, restrictive, inflexible protagonists can't compete with creating your own character.

I have nothing against those games and full enjoyed, and loved, all three Mass Effect games (although at least you had more flexibility in those games on your character than the Witcher). I also have nothing against the W3 at all. I just don't think it competes with being able to create your own character.

If I want to watch a movie I do. If I want to read a book I do. I just happen to enjoy games when I have more freedom in them. I also think it can be just as engrossing and difficult to create a more open style game then a linear restrictive one.

While it is basically true that no one likes your character like you do yourself (much like no one really cares for that new puppy, kid, wife, etc. as much as you do) that doesn't mean other people don't enjoy sharing images, stories, etc with other people.

For that matter Geralt IS someone's character - the guy who made him. Reality is that many people do care about other people's characters when it comes to books and movies. Of course that is on a far different scale and only the really good writers will get mass appeal and exposure.

Anyhow getting off topic. For the record while I would love to have a game set in the witcher universe with the same level of detail and atmosphere as the W3 I fully understand the desire and importance of having Geralt as the main character. There are many games where people can create their own character so there is no need to remove Geralt or change the game. But at the same time people can still like the idea of what it might be like to make your own witcher in such a game world.

 

[MigRib]

I have nothing against those games and full enjoyed, and loved, all three Mass Effect games (although at least you had more flexibility in those games on your character than the Witcher). I also have nothing against the W3 at all. I just don't think it competes with being able to create your own character.

If I want to watch a movie I do. If I want to read a book I do. I just happen to enjoy games when I have more freedom in them. I also think it can be just as engrossing and difficult to create a more open style game then a linear restrictive one.

Well, that makes sense. For some seconds I thought that I had logged in to the wrong forum

 

[Myrthos]

Though if pointing out they could make a game to their liking is not liking it here, I didn't understand that and will reframe from saying that any more as I do like it here and everyone here.

I did not say that. I said both statements are as constructive. Obviously I meant that both statements are completely not constructive.
I have used the statement 'if you don't like it here, you can go somewhere else' before, but am refraining from using it for some time, as it actually indicates not being able to stand criticism and having nothing sensible to say anymore. It is the same as saying "you are not allowed to complain about this site anymore".
Saying to someone they could make a game themselves that matches what they want, is in the same order. In my opinion, it is the same as saying: "you are not allowed to complain about this game anymore".
In both cases the statement is made most likely, because the person making it does not like the complaints or the person (or both).

 

[CelticFrost]

I did not say that. I said both statements are as constructive. Obviously I meant that both statements are completely not constructive.
I have used the statement 'if you don't like it here, you can go somewhere else' before, but am refraining from using it for some time, as it actually indicates not being able to stand criticism and having nothing sensible to say anymore. It is the same as saying "you are not allowed to complain about this site anymore".
Saying to someone they could make a game themselves that matches what they want, is in the same order. In my opinion, it is the same as saying: "you are not allowed to complain about this game anymore".
In both cases the statement is made most likely, because the person making it does not like the complaints or the person (or both).

Understood and I do like it here and everyone here even if we differ in opinion at times.

 

[BoboTheMighty]

Here we go again...again the same pointless debate and again the same results.
Set in protagonists have more advantage when it comes to having better written, more cohesive dialogue, responsiveness and characterization compared to create your own characters who excell at flexibility and player's ability to relate to it.
Why is it so hard to understand this...there is no right or wrong here, only how well game developers execute this.
Entire Witcher narrative would have to be different if they followed the opposite approach...in this case by aiming for a more personal story, focused on characters and their relationships, having a predetermined character was a more advantageous prospect, like in Last of Us, Walking Dead series etc.
I won't complain about TES doing the same thing as Witcher or roleplaying as adult man in JRPG's. They are not made for me, nor would it make sense for devs to develop them that way.
Christ, this is getting tedious.

 

[wolfgrimdark]

Here we go again…again the same pointless debate and again the same results.
Set in protagonists have more advantage when it comes to having better written, more cohesive dialogue, responsiveness and characterization compared to create your own characters who excell at flexibility and player's ability to relate to it.
Why is it so hard to understand this…there is no right or wrong here, only how well game developers execute this.
Entire Witcher narrative would have to be different if they followed the opposite approach…in this case by aiming for a more personal story, focused on characters and their relationships, having a predetermined character was a more advantageous prospect, like in Last of Us, Walking Dead series etc.
I won't complain about TES doing the same thing as Witcher or roleplaying as adult man in JRPG's. They are not made for me, nor would it make sense for devs to develop them that way.
Christ, this is getting tedious.

If it is tedious then why reply? Obviously you dislike the fact that what you claim as fact is just your opinion and nothing more.

For some people a defined character and linear story is better and more enjoyable, for others an open ended game and character system is better. For many people both are actually the best as they enjoy different styles.

The problem is you can't simply lump both together and claim that one is better over the other, which is what you did. They are somewhat apples and oranges.

And now you claim neither is right nor wrong which sounds like you are changing your mind.

Personally I think both have their merits and it comes down to personal taste and preference. Which is why I objected to your your claim they they can't compete against the other as you feel that clearly the linear story and defined character is best - which is opinion not fact.

 

[BoboTheMighty]

I'm not sure where are you getting that I said predetermined characters are absolutely better...only for the story as it is told in Witcher series or "movie games", a predetermined character has more advantage.
I did not state it specifically and I don't think it's neccessary to put "IMO's" at the end of every sentence...but in the context of this thread, I think that's fairly obvious.
It would be equally dumb for Bethesda to try the same approach in their next TES...New Vegas should be the guideline for Fallout IV, instead of Witcher or Mass Effect when it comes to protagonist design.
In my opinion: that's what everyone does here.
Well except for the facts given by that Humanity has Risen! dude.

 

[Aubrielle]

Well except for the facts given by that Humanity has Risen! dude.

Some opinions are always facts.

 

[wolfgrimdark]

I'm not sure where are you getting that I said predetermined characters are absolutely better…only for the story as it is told in Witcher series or "movie games", a predetermined character has more advantage.
I did not state it specifically and I don't think it's neccessary to put "IMO's" at the end of every sentence…but in the context of this thread, I think that's fairly obvious.
It would be equally dumb for Bethesda to try the same approach in their next TES…New Vegas should be the guideline for Fallout IV, instead of Witcher or Mass Effect when it comes to protagonist design.
In my opinion: that's what everyone does here.
Well except for the facts given by that Humanity has Risen! dude.

Ah *blush* sorry. I totally misread your statement then. I thought you meant by can't compete you meant in totality - thus including all games.

As I have to agree for a game like the W3 a story driven defined protagonist is better.

Guess I had way too much coffee this morning. Clearly time to leave this thread.

 

[BoboTheMighty]

Some opinions are always facts.

Well usually everything I say are facts, but then I'd end up contradicting myself here.