Witcher 2 Path choice questions for finishers (spoilers)

I'm at the very end choice of Chapter 1, and I really cannot decide whether to go with the Scoia'tel or with Roche. Has anyone played both these choices through further into the game who can help me with a decision? Who is the ultimate good guy here - Roche or Ioverth?

There is no good choice. Both are either good or evil depending on your perspective. A better way to frame this is in terms of lawful vs chaotic. Do you think the current system of a strong monarchy that provides safety and security for its citizens at the cost of some personal freedoms and racial divisiveness is better, or do you think it's better to lead the land into a bloody civil war so that those who feel left out can find a place for themselves?

There is no right answer, and you may as well just resign yourself to simply picking one and then playing through this game again. This game really is a 4-chapter game, but rather than make it 4 chapters in a row, they instead made two parallel and very different chapter 2's. They really are completely different not only in content and environment and quest choices (they have two completely different quest hubs), but also in background and lore and motivation.

I sided with Iorveth (I think I'm in the minority for a first playthrough based on my reading in forums), and I can tell you that by the time the chapter ended, I had been completely sold on the cause I was fighting for. I just finished my first playthrough last night, and now I am eager to begin again and see if being on the other side of the conflict can do as well of a job at making me believe in the righteousness of their cause.

The Witcher 2 really does implement a revolutionary narrative structure, IMO, and it's a shame that they are not going to be acknowledged for this in game reviews because no review site will wait for a review until after 2 playthroughs (lord knows most can't even get through one). This concept of shortening the overall story but greatly "widening" it so that your choices have world-changing and game-changing consequences is a big risk, but it's one that all CRPG fans should be excited to see.

I _never_ play through RPG's twice. I try every now and then, but always get bored and move on to other games. This is the first game in my 30+ years of playing CRPG's that I'm eager and anxious to start a second playthrough the very next day after beating it. In fact, I think I'm going to start that second playthrough right now…

Fantasm said:

I just finished my first playthrough last night, and now I am eager to begin again and see if being on the other side of the conflict can do as well of a job at making me believe in the righteousness of their cause.

Click to expand...

Witcher 1 also did this. I sided with the Elves, and in that game also felt completely happy with my choice. I then started a replay (never got around to finishing it), determined to this time make the opposite choices, and lo and behold, as far as I got, the game also managed to make these feel right. (Except that I really couldn't handle killing my former buddies, after having done the other side first... :/ )

Goodness but this game is addictive. I was really hoping I could discipline myself and hold back on playing this game since I really should be doing other RL things at the moment, but it's dragged me in and won't let go.

So I'll stick with my choice of Scoia'tel until the end, and then also start a replay of Chapter 2 as soon as that is done.

Thanks for helping out!

I tried to stay on character. In TW1, I sided with the Scoaiatel so I sided with them in TW2 (ultimately, that was also the path I expected to reap the most from TW1 past events, through cameos appearances, the character is lightly greed motivated)

Staying on character was heavily rewarding in this game. Gave several enjoyable situations that came close to gray decisions.

For example, in TW1, the character took the oath toward the Lady of the Lake, including never lying.
Played all the game with this in mind. Probably never lied. A path that is really well exploited by the game.

You're right, you know. Although this game doesn't have black and white, good and evil, it does have more subtle roleplaying moral choices, such as like you said, not lying. There are many instances where one could have lied to "be kind' such as to help the female Scoia'tel agent in Act 1, but the game does not seem seem to reward this. I found the "rewards" in the incense quest a bit confusing, though.

First you get rewarded for being honest, but at the end of the quest, you kind of get punished for it. Possibly this is how real life works, so kudos to CDPR for not following formulaic archetypes and stereotypes too closely. This (not knowing if the game will reward or penalize you) kind of helps the player to do real roleplaying as opposed to just making a certain choice for the possible in-game rewards you might get for it.

I also liked that they did not stereotype humans/non-humans, and males/females too much. For instance, you get Cedric vs Iorveth as relative opposites, and the Scoia'tel vs the more peaceful non-humans. As far as female roles were concerned, (although there are a lot of women being sexual stereotypes) I really liked Saskia (Joan D'Arc, anyone?), and the variety of sorceresses (which of course are to a large extent borrowed from the Sapkowski books. )