Finished it… (Spoilers abound!)

> I kind of feel the end cutscene didn't give many answers.

Same here. I was wondering if this was always the case or a result of too "open" choices regarding my Geralt's identity and love-life.


I kind of expected the entire "identity" quest to return as a slideshow showing Geralt's future (and I admit that I tried to make it "happy") but nothing of the like occurs.

Does any choice influence the ending at all, except which side to fight for?

i don't think alvin and the grandmaster are the same. i do think there is a link however and its has something to do with the soceresses. i think that some soceress gave the grand master the amulet and may have been had some control/influence over him just as triss tried to use the amulet to 'help' alvin. there was really too much talk about alvin being 'like a son' for him not to be just an innocent child at least in this game. i must be the only person who put my trust with shani over triss, next game i'll trust triss as i'm sure i missed out on a whole different story arc.

there was one book i could never sell and it had to do with 'shadow people' or somesuch from one of the border nations. i wonder if that's who the assassin is, because i didn't recognize it as a witcher and it difenitely looked human…although maybe it was one of the 'young' witchers from kaer moden…

I think the case is pretty strong. It's summarized here: [ http://witcher.wikia.com/wiki/Alvin ].

don't forget that raymond chandler also wasn't who he seemed. people are too eager to accept obvious conclusions rather than those with meaning. some would rather drive a square peg into a round hole rather than leave the hole empty (ie the case with the 12th paladin in gothic 3). i guess we are going to have to wait for witcher 2 to find out most likely. though some questions are never answered and maybe it along with end video are just the devs crafty storyhole making designed to really make us yearn for the witcher 2.

Given all the little bits of information in the game I think the only conclusion is that Alvin and the GM are the same.

The amulet would look older as he went back thirty or fourty years , so the amulet aged with Alvin/GM. Also in the village ( Murky Waters) when playing with the kids he also mentions "wanting to be the GM"

its a good thing you guys aren't attorneys
i simply fail to see how most people are missing the underlining element about choices and consequences. it wouldn't seem right to me that they would make a game that addresses this topic so well and implemented in such a way that your choices make a real difference. why then would 'the king of the hunt' or death, the one who supposedly shapes destiny be right, and that no matter what you did to help alvin matter. it just seems to opposing to not only the game design, but an overall sense of abilities to change yourself and the world through action. i mean if berenger can be redeemed (or was in my case) through actions why not an orhaned child (who are much easier to help change).

also i think maybe some people haven't watched enough back to the future to fully grasp time travel. if alvin was a kid first he wouldn't have had any of the reasons to lead a life of hate. if he could control time travel why didn't he just jump again to the future. a timid child would hardly have preffered the past to the future. wouldn't that have put him in the time of the 'great war' of the recent past?
yes there are coincendences, but to me those never supercede logic, which to me dictates alvin must not grow up to be a madman doomed to death.