|
Post by Elliot Kane on Dec 20, 2007 19:42:18 GMT
It is definitely tacky & juvenile - that's what makes it so funny! ;D
Taken seriously, it could actually be offensive to men, too, as it seems to be saying that 'real men' are anyone's at the drop of a hat as long as they're hot and personality be darned. Talk about shallow...
Neither sex gets any real respect if you really look at it.
As it is, though, the cards turn it into a kind of farce. 'Shagemon - gotta catch 'em all' if you like ;D
|
|
|
Post by Alrik on Dec 20, 2007 21:57:07 GMT
I just point out to the fact that - as someone over there at RPGWatch stated it - the game is modelled after very, *very* well-known books of a Polish author, and the character is a well-established hero in his world. So, for example, the "frequency of sex" is - as far as I read - also in these books. Edit: Sorry, can't find the thread again. Edit: Besides, I just found this: www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3408
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Dec 20, 2007 21:59:24 GMT
More than likely, Alrik I'm sure the game is a very faithful reflection It's a great game, I just find that particular aspect amusing
|
|
|
Post by Winterfox on Dec 20, 2007 22:10:59 GMT
I just point out to the fact that - as someone over there at RPGWatch stated it - the game is modelled after very, *very* well-known books of a Polish author, and the character is a well-established hero in his world. I'm aware of that. Which seems to suggest that these novels are basically wank fantasies wish-fulfillment fantasy for boys, by boys. Not exactly something I'd read in a hurry.
|
|
|
Post by mysterd on Dec 24, 2007 22:27:39 GMT
The Witcher might be in the fantasy genre, but it is a very gray, dark, and bleak take on a very, very medieval European-based world. And, to add to this -- the world is filled w/ very bleak takes on....well, pretty much EVERYTHING when it comes to topics. Whether it's the game's take on misogyny, sex itself, sexism, racism, or whatever the case might happen to be. Everything about The Witcher is supposed to make you want to get under your skin and want to make you crawl.
In many quests, you will wind up taking what might look to be a "good" path in any other normal RPG, but taking this road could result in you picking the lesser of say two evils (or more evils) or even picking a path in which the outcome is worse than taking what would usually an "evil" path. Many games use "good" and "evil" for decisions and nothing in-between; while The Witcher often opts for the gray matter. Witcher basically is letting every decision you make bare some sort of consequence, whether you are doing the right thing, the wrong thing, or somewhere in-between.
About Geralt, yeah -- he's not a nice guy. He's not supposed to be, either. Just look at how he treats most women and people, in general. He's a very cold person; probably b/c he's a mutant that is sterile, from being experimented on and whatnot. So, he really can't get a woman pregnant, I'm sure that gives him even more reason to be quite the nympho, whether you think it's right or wrong. And I'm sure some, like Geralt and some of the women who chase him, who are looking just for sex might find this as a chance to find some sort of release from frustrations of the bleak world, of their flaws, and whatever else you can think of. (From what I gather, this is gone into more details in the books -- which I don't have and have yet to read.)
Also, he's a very famous "hero" -- if you consider him a hero, he just basically has that title attached him, if you ask me. Basically, he's a medieval rockstar. So, he is not doing good (when he does) just to do good; he often takes advantage of rewards a "good" person wouldn't opt to. He often doesn't resist temptations that he wants to sleep with a woman, that a woman wants to sleep with him, or combos of both. So, he's probably used to some women throwing themselves at him -- and he, of course, he most often does the same, too. So, I'm sure given what he's done in performing quests and getting in bed with many of women -- which you can consider his "trophies." Yes, that is exactly what the sex cards basically represent -- as I said, Geralt might be a hero in some regards (killing monsters), he's not a hero in every sense of the word. Especially w/ the lifestyle he leads of constantly traveling, trying to make $ and fame from taking on "contracts", quests, and basically just living life in the fast lane. He's definitely no saint.
It's mentioned in the game, a few times about his sterile-ness; such as if you talk to Morwynn (did I spell her name right?) The Dryad in the woods, who doesn't really want to have sex w/ him b/c he can't actually produce children. (You can try to convince her otherwise, if you say the "correct" things to try and convince her otherwise...)
Geralt is not the type of guy who would settle down, even though a part of him might actually want to -- and there is that part, as it is explore if you go down the romantic path w/ Shani and try to be a father to Alvin. Namely, just look at the dialogues w/ him and Shani. She even tries to change him, throughout the course of the game, bossing him around from time to time to get what she wants out of him. Also, Geralt doesn't ever flat-out say he loves Shani (if you aim to take that path to romance Shani), but he says "he thinks" he loves her.
Also, if you do some of the quests on the Island in -- I think it's Chapter 4 -- and you do choose to romance further on the "Shani path", you can see that Geralt is even thinking of how great it would be settle down away from the city -- something that obviously Shani would obviously like. For examples, see the letters you as Geralt do write to Shani via the Fisher King and often what Geralt says to Alvin; especially if you take the fatherly role towards Alvin.
But, he's also got Triss whom he does admit "he loves," I've heard if you try and take the "romance Triss" pathway. Now, they've always been loyal to each other for a long time (she appears in most of the books and in his life, from what I know) -- and the game makes sure when you first meet her in the game to make that known (namely to those who ain't read the books), anyways. Triss just basically accepts him for who and what-the-hell he actually is -- flaws and all. And believe me, Geralt got plenty of flaws. I think Geralt loves that loyalty that she has to him.
I think Geralt loves that loyalty that she has to him -- I mean, even if you do take Alvin to Shani (instead of Triss), Triss does get quite pissed off about it and doesn't really want to see you anymore. Even if she is mad at you, she will still somewhat be be your side (so that you can stop evil), but just not as much as she normally would've -- as she still will somewhat remain in Geralt's life.
|
|
|
Post by mysterd on Dec 24, 2007 22:44:50 GMT
It is definitely tacky & juvenile - that's what makes it so funny! ;D Taken seriously, it could actually be offensive to men, too, as it seems to be saying that 'real men' are anyone's at the drop of a hat as long as they're hot and personality be darned. Talk about shallow... Neither sex gets any real respect if you really look at it. As it is, though, the cards turn it into a kind of farce. 'Shagemon - gotta catch 'em all' if you like ;D You can't really catch all of the cards in one game. You will have to play again and take other pathways, to do so. Namely, to get Triss's 2nd card, you have to go after Triss romantically. Also, to get Shani's 2nd card, you have to after Shani romantically. The game doesn't allow you to romance BOTH Shani AND Triss. There's a reason to that. Deciding who you give Alvin to -- whether it's Shani or Triss, namely opens up the chance of getting a 2nd card from one of the two characters. Oh, and I think you can only get Rayla's sex-card in Chap 5, if you actually side with The Order (instead of siding w/ The Elves) by the end of Chapter 4. (By the way, I sided w/ The Order by the end of Chap 4, first time around.)
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Dec 24, 2007 23:35:57 GMT
I went with the Order myself. The Squirrels were that bit too fanatical for my liking, and I liked the knight guy - which pretty much sorted the distinction between the sides to me. One side is killing innocent people, the other is not. The Order's champion is a classic 'Hero' where Geralt himself is basically 'The Protagonist'. The head of the Squirrels is pretty much a lunatic...
Completely awesome game, though, and I'll definitely play it again at some point in the future. It just completely destroys every other RPG out there except for PS:T which is a more personal experience in many ways and gives you far greater control over the personality of your character.
It's very dark, very bleak and utterly awesome.
I actually didn't pursue either romance path really, the first time. I took Alvin to Triss because I thought taking him to Shani would get Shani killed. I didn't really trust Triss - she had a few too many irons in the fire for my liking and was open about none of them.
Next time - who knows? I actually preferred Shani as a person.
|
|
|
Post by Winterfox on Dec 25, 2007 7:45:00 GMT
The Witcher might be in the fantasy genre, but it is a very gray, dark, and bleak take on a very, very medieval European-based world. And, to add to this -- the world is filled w/ very bleak takes on....well, pretty much EVERYTHING when it comes to topics. Whether it's the game's take on misogyny, sex itself, sexism, racism, or whatever the case might happen to be. Everything about The Witcher is supposed to make you want to get under your skin and want to make you crawl. For the record, at this point in time, this is no longer anything new. Thanks partly perhaps to GRRM (who, yea mightily, is like unto a god), a fair portion of the fantasy genre have gone down the road of gritty moral ambiguity with a vengeance. I get slightly irritated at the assumption that all of fantasy is like Eragon or, for that matter, LOTR. The genre's come a long way. Not long enough for my liking, but enough that these things are no longer an exception. Also, Geralt as a character--well, let's just say that he appears to have been heavily influenced by one Elric of Melnibone. And as much as I enjoy the game's refusal to cater to a black-and-white morality, I can't really say it makes my skin crawl. Geralt is too detached, and the frequently nonsensical writing is something of a barrier. Yes, yes, I'm playing with the original, uncut English script.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 6, 2008 13:15:12 GMT
New patch deals with those annoying load times, apparently. Quite how well is another thing, of course - but any reduction has to be good
|
|
|
Post by Winterfox on Jan 6, 2008 19:56:28 GMT
It is effective, though not for the initial load time. But now when you, say, enter one of the houses in Vizima, the load time is about halved.
|
|
|
Post by The Sonar Chicken on Jan 6, 2008 23:14:10 GMT
Damn... I so want to play this game.
One question: is romance a compulsory thingy or is it not?
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 6, 2008 23:35:42 GMT
Not really, no. I dodged the romance part. The sex is a lot harder to avoid, but I THINK it's avoidable if you're really careful...
|
|
|
Post by The Sonar Chicken on Jan 6, 2008 23:57:18 GMT
Not really, no. I dodged the romance part. The sex is a lot harder to avoid, but I THINK it's avoidable if you're really careful... Oh okay... 'cos seriously: from what I've read, it appears as though some of the characters tried to change him. As though that sorta thing does any good. Though... not too sure if I'd really enjoy playing as a completely amoral person. I much prefer a blank slate(no picking of alignments) and having your actions define your character: that is, if there was an alignment system, your alignment would fluctuate according to the situation and the people you deal with, and also factoring in your moods and other stuff. On a good mood day, I help slay the monsters. On a bad mood day, I watch the monsters wipe out everything and make children cry. Btw, this is yet another game where the main char has amnesia. Does he ever regain his memories? And do you ever get to see what sort of person he was like, before? Ah well: I should dl the demo and give it a shot.
|
|
|
Post by The Sonar Chicken on Jan 7, 2008 0:42:47 GMT
Still, this game sounds like a product of our times which is obsessed with death, destruction and anything that decays or corrupts people, culture and society. Imho, grey decisions have positive and negative outcomes of varying amounts. To implement decisions where every outcome, either good or bad, will lead to some "dark, tormented future" sounds like a game where the main character might as well give up on living 'cos death sounds like a better remedy.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 7, 2008 0:45:49 GMT
Weeeellll... You could look at it that way, I guess...
|
|
|
Post by The Sonar Chicken on Jan 7, 2008 5:36:36 GMT
Weeeellll... You could look at it that way, I guess... Well, that's what I think, given that there seem to be tons of media(movies, comics, cartoons, books, etc.) that revolve around a decaying society, with the creators trying to tackle various issues in such a setting. Anyways, is there really anything wrong with taking advantage of your rewards? Haven't most of us grown up in such a society: "doing good while maximising all your returns"? And hey, if that means you gotta be cruel and amoral and even tread on others in order to be the "hero", so be it. Aren't most "do-gooders" people who aim to serve their own ends? Besides, lots of people "do good" not 'cos they've got a heart of gold. They do it 'cos going against the law is often more trouble than being with the law or they value friendship more than causing trouble.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 7, 2008 8:36:20 GMT
People write what they know a lot of the time. Makes it easier, I guess
|
|
|
Post by Winterfox on Jan 7, 2008 16:38:18 GMT
Still, this game sounds like a product of our times which is obsessed with death, destruction and anything that decays or corrupts people, culture and society. Imho, grey decisions have positive and negative outcomes of varying amounts. To implement decisions where every outcome, either good or bad, will lead to some "dark, tormented future" sounds like a game where the main character might as well give up on living 'cos death sounds like a better remedy. No, it's a counter to all the feel-good escapist fantasy out there. You can't tell me those don't still dominate: your average movie will have the good guys win, the bad guys lose, and everything fixed at the end. Consider the popularity of fiction like Harry Potter and LOTR.
|
|
|
Post by The Sonar Chicken on Jan 7, 2008 18:03:45 GMT
Still, this game sounds like a product of our times which is obsessed with death, destruction and anything that decays or corrupts people, culture and society. Imho, grey decisions have positive and negative outcomes of varying amounts. To implement decisions where every outcome, either good or bad, will lead to some "dark, tormented future" sounds like a game where the main character might as well give up on living 'cos death sounds like a better remedy. No, it's a counter to all the feel-good escapist fantasy out there. You can't tell me those don't still dominate: your average movie will have the good guys win, the bad guys lose, and everything fixed at the end. Consider the popularity of fiction like Harry Potter and LOTR. Yeah well... a lot of "feel good" fiction appeals to the child inside the person. And in this kinda society where people want a break from all those problems, they'd reach for something which makes them feel happy and warm inside. Hmmm... I've read a ton of really popular comics like Death Note, Shin Angyo Onshi and a ton of other stuff where the "main character" is a guy/gal with completely no morals. Okay, not all are "fantasy" but some are really dark fantasy. Like: the person is on the good side but can be absolutely ruthless and be even psychopathic or a stalker. Or enjoy engaging in genocide(mass murder), etc. And then there's Claymore where the setting is almost exactly like Witcher: the female fighters in "an organisation" are all half-breeds: monster + human. 'Cos of their powers, they're able to fight against the monsters. The setting is kinda European, the people are mainly apathetic and there're themes of rape, murder, etc. Granted there's no genocide, no terrorism and a few other of the Witcher themes but the whole setting is pretty gritty too. I also recalled the novel series which was definitely not your standard fantasy: just don't recall the title. It was by Hebee or some similar name. Still, a lot of Western fantasy fiction or comics I've recalled were pretty bleah. The people must be good so they're good, the villain must be bad so they're bad. There's no allegiance between either side: no blurring of relations and stuff. Anyways: Still, I hope the game doesn't "lock" you into making decisions which're favourable towards the plot like: if you want the game to be playable, you must choose the outcome that grants minimal side effects. Or that the npcs are not "skewed" in a sense: that is, the game determines that this society is decaying and gritty, thus all npcs will not be able to appreciate positive acts. I can understand if a fighter who's accustomed to death and destruction will not care what you do but a bunch of civilians who've been in deep trouble for years?
|
|
|
Post by Winterfox on Jan 7, 2008 18:24:48 GMT
Hmmm... I've read a ton of really popular comics like Death Note, Shin Angyo Onshi and a ton of other stuff where the "main character" is a guy/gal with completely no morals. Okay, not all are "fantasy" but some are really dark fantasy. Tell me these are more popular than tripe like Naruto, Bleach, Inuyasha and crap like that, and I shall be force to call you the lyingest liar that ever lied. Dark/amoral fiction has a growing fanbase, but it doesn't remotely come near to the humongous, drooling mass that prefers simplistic morals and predictable, formulaic characters and plots. Actually, as much as I like Claymore: no. The "good" Claymores tend to be, well, pretty good. Yeah, they're developed characters, no argument about that. But are they particularly amoral? Not really. The theme of a secretive organization and humans persecuting others for being "different" is nothing new. See X-Men. Claymore's setting is no fluffy fantasyland, but next to some others, it's not that dark or gritty. Also, again, it has limited popularity either as manga or anime. It will never spawn series with episodes in the triple digits.
|
|