Because they started building that up in The Witcher 3 nine years ago ?
The only answer they should have to provide is “because we wanted to and anyone who has a problem with that can go fuck themselves.”
Short sections where you play as a teenage white girl = not politics Entire game playing as white woman = politics
I like that they call out how layered she is. I really loved her in the books and I’m excited to see how they capture that in the game.
Cause Geralt retired in the dlc duh!
Also in the main story. At least in the “canon” ending
Also, IIRC, at the time they said he was done as a character.
Man, Blood and Wine was such an amazing DLC
Thought it was a good opportunity to switch to a custom protagonist. Oh well.
That was my hope as well, especially after CP2077.
IDK, honestly. one of my biggest takeaways from cp2077 is it felt like they wanted to do a more guided story in an open world and struggled with the custom character aspect. like how the origins were all basically meaningless after the first 10 minutes.
the frustrating part of cyberpunk was feeling railroaded into a specific character with specific attitudes and ideas. really, they were just doing what they know and what they’re good at creating a character driven narrative based on existing characters. I’m happy to see them go back to that because i think they’re just better at it.
They didn’t had to do the origins, but I think it’s more a result of them generally struggling with the development. The game has shortcomings everywhere, especially in its story. The whole intro with Jackie is just meh and you’re supposed to like him so that it is this big traumatic hit when he dies but I just did not care. Then they introduce this moronic unlikable character of Silverhand which guides you through the whole game in some inconsistent ways, and I could not care less about this asshole, especially since his character started to rub off on V. To think they only did this because Keanu Reeves suggested them that the character should have a bigger role and that the original story apparently looked very different… Not even starting on the last mission which I could not even bother doing because I already knew V finds an end there and you can then only load a previous save to keep playing the open world. So of course, not caring about the story, I did not care about that either.
Obviously I could not be bothered to buy the paid DLC that wasn’t supposed to exist either.
I did like having my own character creation though. I did like having the ability to roam an open world and buy things. But I would’ve preferred a game with less of an idiotic story, hell, drop the story and instead work on more open world content and features instead. Be a little more sandboxy and open ended instead of having me play the hero of my own story.
As for the Witcher… Don’t care. I never got into it. Got through most of the first game but the choices & character drama annoyed me and I could not get into Geralt either. Combat, monsters and story felt blegh so I just dropped it. Could not be arsed to pick it up again.
The first witcher game is classic eurojank. It took me 4 false starts to get through it. Witcher 2 was better and so was 3. Though 3 really laid the open world junk on thick and could’ve benefited from a bit of linearity.
oh man, to judge the entire Witcher series on the first one is intense. they’re all very very different games. you should try the third one on its own.
it’s like saying you don’t like mmos because you didn’t like classic RuneScape in the 90s. or like saying you don’t like rpgs because text based adventures weren’t your thing. not exactly representative.
Its okay, you can say it. Modern identity politics and existing market familiarity.
I mean, it would have been maybe more interesting to me to play as my own character in the Witcher universe, but Ciri is not the worst choice in the world, even if she was an extremely predictable pick for protagonist.
EDIT: “Come to Lemmy, we are way more chill and less hostile than Reddit.” Lol, whoever told me this was obviously lying. It’s exactly the same here, just with more Tankies.
Isn’t this a little like hating on Geralt in W3 because he was extremely predictable pick for a protagonist?
It’s so easy to pick out the bigots when you say “women can do things too” and they lose their mind and start ranting about “modern identity politics”.
Yes, I am the bigot that usually picks to play as a woman in video games ever since they had the option. How very bigoted of me.
Yes, you are. Glad you understand.
You don’t play female characters because you’re a supporter of strong heroic women and want to embody one. You do it because you want to look at a female character on your screen. This really isn’t the flex you think it is.
Metroid and Alien are two of my favorite franchises, both featuring strong heroic women as the central character, but go off.
Thanks for telling me to just block you, proving that Lemmy is not the place of positivity that it was advertised to me as. Some of you Lemmy users are just as hateful as users somewhere like on t social, gotta love it.
Lemmy is very left-leaning, and you complained about “modern identity politics” from having a female lead in a video game. You shouldn’t be surprised at all.
You know that incels have a smell, right?
Sounds like a projection
The smell incels have does project pretty far, yes
Can you describe the smell ?
No one here seems to think we need to, son. Try soap.
What do you mean by “modern identity politics”?
They mean ‘women protagonists bad!’
No, that is not what I mean. I usually pick to play as a woman in games anyway. But I won’t explain it now, since you have just assumed something incorrect and I know it will be more frustrating for people here to leave it this way.
I didn’t assume, you broadcasted it with ‘modern identity politics’ bullshit.
Yes, women protagonists are so EVIL, thats exactly why I almost always intentionally pick to play as them! Wow, you are so smart!
Looks like you meant to reply to some other post.
Edit: …
Thanks for visiting. Don’t stay so long next time.
Read, then post.
I kinda see what you wanted to say in the second part of your message but I have to hardly disagree with the first part
I’m glad for that move. By the end of Witcher 3 I was supremely fed up with Geralt’s whole shtick. I couldn’t take anymore of that giant hunk of boring constantly tripping over thirsty sexy single witches near his location. The so called “dating sim” part was nothing more than basic fan service. I’m liking Ciri’s “I’m done” energy in the trailer.
So will she be retroactively declared a witcher? Because she never was one.
Wasn’t her becoming a Witcher one of the W3 possible endings?
It was? Huh, wasn’t aware of that. She never came back in my playthroughs. :(
Yeah, there are multiple endings based on arbitrary choices made in the some of the dialogues scattered throughout the game. In the “good” ending, Ciri wins and survives, and Geralt gifts her a silver sword, implying that she becomes a witcher
The Trial of Grasses is kind of a defining moment in a witcher’s life.
Thats really my only beef at the moment with the choice, but I’ve been awake for over 48 hours so I’m not thinking too clearly at the moment.
She’s chugging potions and using Witcher spells like Igni, so she must have gone through the trial at some point. But that could actually be a plot point shown in flashbacks.
I’m curious if her own teleporting powers are affected by the trial though. That electric thing she does in the trailer doesn’t look like any of the known Witcher tricks.
Devs made a video that confirmed that she went through the Trial of the Grasses (plus in some shots you can see her cat eyes).
I’m assuming that Yennefer helped somehow, given that she was able to keep Uma alive during his Trial.
But also, Ciri knows full magic, not just signs, because Yennefer and Triss taught her, AFAIK. So it seems to make sense that her combat magic is more advanced than standard witcher signs
I’ll admit, I haven’t watched it. Nor do I intend to. And I tried to allude to CDPR doing… something to explain it.
I’ve seen too many decent games ruined by hype trains, so I do my best to avoid them and form my own judgements.
I tend to be a lore nerd before a min-maxer in games, though that wasn’t always the case.
The “best” build isn’t always the most enjoyable. Don’t get me wrong, I LOVE theory crafting ridiculous shit - but if you trounce all your enemies, conquer every social interaction, and breeze through the game… where is the adventure?
Hell, the BEST DND player I’ve played with lasted three sessions. Second Edition. Gnome Fighter with 3 INT. He was, sadly, too dumb to live. But man, I enjoyed every session with that character. Barrel of laughs, and his “idiocy” could be really ingenious. Dangerous to everyone around him, friend or foe, but he got results.
Sadly, he re-rolled with a more optimized character. It survived, but it was not nearly as much fun.
