Best path - Roche or Iorveth, for Witcher 3? (minor spoilers)

[soopytwist]

The first time I played Witcher 2 (when it was released) I chose Roche's path at the critical moment (just before Act II). I never did keep my save games though because: One, I didn't think a Witcher 3 would be made and Two, did not think it would transfer previous saves if there were.

In my second play through now I've found myself making different decisions from those that I remember making four years ago. I didn't end up fighting Loredo in Flotsam and I gave Iorveth a sword when Roche's men attached after the conversation with the king slayer, Letho.

Clearly taking Iorveth's path would be the better option for me considering I sided with Roche the last time, but what's better for Witcher 3?

If I'm to transfer my saves from Witcher 2 to Witcher 3 what is considered the better path to follow - Iorveth or Roche? Or does it matter?

[Chunkarock]

I'm sorry but what do you want exactly? You want a side that will leave you with benefits in part 3?

[soopytwist]

Originally posted by Centurio:

I'm sorry but what do you want exactly? You want a side that will leave you with benefits in part 3?

No, just what makes the better Witcher 3 experience, choosing Vernon Roche or Iorveth in Witcher 2?

[Chunkarock]

Well, that's entirely up to you. The Witcher games and their choices are all shaded in gray. As you've noticed by now, everyone is evil and you choose the choices that you think is right. So, if you think that the elves deserve the freedom that they want and you want to join a cause that has a low probability of ever seeing the light of day, then choose Iorveth. If you want a path of political intrigue that will put you in the center of it all, then choose Roche but with the lingering thought that you could've done something for the elves. It's all up to you, otherwise, what would be the point of choices in games if in the end, you're just craving for the best experience possible?

[soopytwist]

Originally posted by Centurio:

Well, that's entirely up to you. The Witcher games and their choices are all shaded in gray. As you've noticed by now, everyone is evil and you choose the choices that you think is right. So, if you think that the elves deserve the freedom that they want and you want to join a cause that has a low probability of ever seeing the light of day, then choose Iorveth. If you want a path of political intrigue that will put you in the center of it all, then choose Roche but with the lingering thought that you could've done something for the elves. It's all up to you, otherwise, what would be the point of choices in games if in the end, you're just craving for the best experience possible?

Well I realise it's subjective of course and having one path shouldn't make the other less interesting to play. I just wondered if there were any events in Witcher 3 that would be fuller having made one decision over the other. Perhaps a difficult boss fight that's made easier because I chose the elves or a great swath of the map that's denied to me because I'm the enemy of the elves. That sort of thing.

Going slightly off topic, in Mass Effect I saved the Rachni queen and she came to Shepards aid in Mass Effect 3. I wondered if there any moments like that in Witcher 3.

[Senpai Potato]

It depends on what kind of witcher you are going for. If neutral, it is best to side with Iorveth. If Temerian go with Roche etc. Here is a useful link to all of the different witchers.[forums.cdprojektred.com]

[Senpai Potato]

Originally posted by soopytwist:

Originally posted by Centurio:

Well, that's entirely up to you. The Witcher games and their choices are all shaded in gray. As you've noticed by now, everyone is evil and you choose the choices that you think is right. So, if you think that the elves deserve the freedom that they want and you want to join a cause that has a low probability of ever seeing the light of day, then choose Iorveth. If you want a path of political intrigue that will put you in the center of it all, then choose Roche but with the lingering thought that you could've done something for the elves. It's all up to you, otherwise, what would be the point of choices in games if in the end, you're just craving for the best experience possible?

Well I realise it's subjective of course and having one path shouldn't make the other less interesting to play. I just wondered if there were any events in Witcher 3 that would be fuller having made one decision over the other. Perhaps a difficult boss fight that's made easier because I chose the elves or a great swath of the map that's denied to me because I'm the enemy of the elves. That sort of thing.

Going slightly off topic, in Mass Effect I saved the Rachni queen and she came to Shepards aid in Mass Effect 3. I wondered if there any moments like that in Witcher 3.

Problem with witcher is that it follows book narration in a way. Therefore there are no major choices/consequences from witcher 2 to witcher 3. Yet you might encounter some of the persons from witcher 2 depending on your choices, and perhaps get a minor side quest? :) It's not as open to choices as per say Mass Effect, if that is what you were hoping for. Therefore go with what you think are the right choices.

[Chunkarock]

Originally posted by soopytwist:

Originally posted by Centurio:

Well, that's entirely up to you. The Witcher games and their choices are all shaded in gray. As you've noticed by now, everyone is evil and you choose the choices that you think is right. So, if you think that the elves deserve the freedom that they want and you want to join a cause that has a low probability of ever seeing the light of day, then choose Iorveth. If you want a path of political intrigue that will put you in the center of it all, then choose Roche but with the lingering thought that you could've done something for the elves. It's all up to you, otherwise, what would be the point of choices in games if in the end, you're just craving for the best experience possible?

Well I realise it's subjective of course and having one path shouldn't make the other less interesting to play. I just wondered if there were any events in Witcher 3 that would be fuller having made one decision over the other. Perhaps a difficult boss fight that's made easier because I chose the elves or a great swath of the map that's denied to me because I'm the enemy of the elves. That sort of thing.

Going slightly off topic, in Mass Effect I saved the Rachni queen and she came to Shepards aid in Mass Effect 3. I wondered if there any moments like that in Witcher 3.

Well, if it gives you the answer that you're looking for, after playing part 3 for 51 hours and after importing a save that dates back to The Witcher 1, I can confidently say that none of the choices have any severe effect in part 3. CDPR made sure that the story will accomodate new players, especially since the game being multiplatform and all that. So only expect the minor of minor references like character mentions, in-universe humor for the past players, and the aftermath of some of the heaviest decisions that you've made in part 1 and 2.

[soopytwist]

Originally posted by Centurio:

Originally posted by soopytwist:

Well I realise it's subjective of course and having one path shouldn't make the other less interesting to play. I just wondered if there were any events in Witcher 3 that would be fuller having made one decision over the other. Perhaps a difficult boss fight that's made easier because I chose the elves or a great swath of the map that's denied to me because I'm the enemy of the elves. That sort of thing.

Going slightly off topic, in Mass Effect I saved the Rachni queen and she came to Shepards aid in Mass Effect 3. I wondered if there any moments like that in Witcher 3.

Well, if it gives you the answer that you're looking for, after playing part 3 for 51 hours and after importing a save that dates back to The Witcher 1, I can confidently say that none of the choices have any severe effect in part 3. CDPR made sure that the story will accomodate new players, especially since the game being multiplatform and all that. So only expect the minor of minor references like character mentions, in-universe humor for the past players, and the aftermath of some of the heaviest decisions that you've made in part 1 and 2.

Right. Thanks. I think I'll stick with Iorveth for this play through then. Primarily because I want a different experience to last time.

[tiberiansun371alexw]

Roche

[Petersaber]

I went with Roche, but appereantly Iorveth's path is the "good" path. It's more optimistic.

Which makes a lot of sense, considering Iorveth is a terrorist, kills civilians, disregards non-humans living in human cities, and that the Squirrels betray you more than once. Of course we should put our faith with him, and not the man who believed us, helped us, and has a similar mission to ours.

I'm kind of upset because of that. I'm half-tempted to reload my save from before that decision.

[tiberiansun371alexw]

Originally posted by Petersaber:

I went with Roche, but appereantly Iorveth's path is the "good" path. It's more optimistic.

Which makes a lot of sense, considering Iorveth is a terrorist, kills civilians, disregards non-humans living in human cities, and that the Squirrels betray you more than once. Of course we should put our faith with him, and not the man who believed us, helped us, and has a similar mission to ours.

I'm kind of upset because of that. I'm half-tempted to reload my save from before that decision.

I would say that the characters are more optimistic of thier situation, but their SITUATION isn't when the Geralt follows the terrorists (who betrayed you in the backstory of the books and in game 2...) in The Witcher 2. So yes you should put your faith in the man who beleived geralt.

[soopytwist]

I stuck with Roche in my first play through of Witcher 2 but I didn't keep my saves. So in my second play through I wanted a different experience to last time so that's why I switched allegiance to Iorveth. Of course, I could always not import my save and just answer the "previously on" type questions instead.

[Exarch_Alpha]

Iorveth´s path is the best simply because it allows the best possible outcome for Saskia.

[tiberiansun371alexw]

Originally posted by Exarch_Alpha:

Iorveth´s path is the best simply because it allows the best possible outcome for Saskia.

Yeah... no it's not. It's the best outcome for Saskia, but think of Temeria, which is about the fate of a lot more than 1 person.

[DaPitchi]