Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Emhyr is an evil and power hungry schemer, no doubt Ciri (if Empress) also figures into a larger plan rather than Emhyr feeling "old and tired and wanting to rest".
I also don't understand why i should privilege Temeria over Redania and the others...
In the very beggining of the game Vesemir says their side is "the Northern Realms", selling the entire north, so that one realm gets some scraps is just ♥♥♥♥, i hated the "happy Temerians" tone of this ending, what about everywhere else Dandelion?
Djikstra is better than Radovid, he doesn't have notorious prejudices and he is a lot more amenable of a person than Radovid, more likely to delegate and allow some freedoms to the other kingdoms, though still keeping them under control.
In Radovid's favor he is the rightful ruler, if you don't interfere he wins (can't forget that Geralt spent the whole previous game trying to prove he's not a regicide), but he is cruel and ruthless. He won't allow any liberties to the other kingdoms and his prejudices are widely documented, he will do anything to keep and expand his power.
Djikstra it is, just wish he was smarter with how he offed Roche (since there was no way for him to see reason and abandon that ♥♥♥♥♥♥ deal).
that's what i followed too. even if roche isnt friend since in tw2 i did iorveth path :D but he did help me so...
are you saying tw3's world'd offer far worse entertainment than steam? heresy! :D :D :D
- As many people had already mentioned above, there is not a 100% positive ending for the world
RADOVID → Great politician and plotter who somehow went mad and insane with great hatred for the mages caused by his traumatic childhood. He was reasonable and cunning in Witcher 1 and 2, now he is just an older version of King Joffrey who doesn't take "no" as an answer and pretty much gets rid of his own allies if he no longer sees any benefit out of them. He is good at achieving his goals and does everything for them. He uses all of his fathers legacy to secure his power and safety and slowly destroys it. He won the war by prolonging the Nilfgaardian invasion up to the point when he seizes control over Novigrad and has almost unlimited financial support, which Emhyr doesn't have. If he wins, all the cruelty stays in the North as it was before and it gets even worse. Only difference is that the North became Redanian Empire instead. It is stated that this ending is worse than Nilfgaard controlling the North.
EMHYR → Rushing to battle because of his lust for power and securing his position and own life. People in Nilfgaard are tired of his tyranny and ruthlesness, his unsuccessful war campaigns etc. By conquering the North and stepping of the throne he saves his life and achieves his goal - Nilfgaardian Empire ruling the whole continent. In this ending, we get a puppet state called Temeria and almost everything else swallowed by Nilfgaard. Lands are forced to get customed to new traditions, laws and deities, religions and borders.
DIJKSTRA → Same goal as Radovid and same rule as Emhyr. He is no different than those two mentioned above, he just doesn't persecute mages and nonhumans and doesn't want to rape his own daughter for his political goals. This ending tell of more future wars between the North and Nilfgaard.
CIRI → Hearth-breaking choice as she doesn't want to become an Empress and have always dreamed of running free as a witcher hunting monsters in forgotten villages. Moreover she doesn't have any political and ruling experience so it's easy to conclude that she will get easily surrounded by vipers ruling in her stead.
WHAT THE ENDING SHOULD HAVE BEEN → Nilfgaard, ruled by Voorhees, coming up to piece terms with the North, every kingdom independent and self-ruled - Aedirn by Saskia / Stennis / some chancellor (depends on W2 choices), Temeria by Annais with Roche as her most trusted person, Redania by Dijkstra and Kaedwen by chancellor, Cintra restored. Nilfgaard living in piece with the North and agreeing on mutual alliance.
Radovid is not an option... the man is truly insane. A genius, but insane.
I think of what Emhyr brings with him. The "Nilfgaard" way of life, where touching a noble person would get your hand cut off. Maybe this is what it is like in the North, but Geralt seems to imply it isn't to Rosa var Attre . "You wonder why the North hates Nilfgaard." <insert gravelly voice>
White Orchard is a good example again of Nilfgaardian "order", "Nilfgaard cares about one thing order."
I wanted Emhyr to die... it was because of him that good, (okay lets be honest) slightly less bad kings, like Foltest, were murdered and thousands upon thousands of people die. So when I got my ending I was really upset. If anyone deserved to die it was Emhyr. So then I played through the game again... until I found where the choice was made and chose Dijkstra... its better, the North defeats the invaders, and Emhyr dies not by the North's hands but by the people whom he ruled so ruthlessly. It felt like justice... (maybe I am weird) :\
The quote in Dijkstra's ending that makes me sit back and wonder is "All for the good of his subjects... if often against their will." [Thanks to BuzzardBee for finding all these endings so nicely] Sure, his new citizens would want the old ways, Dijkstra mentions early that he and Radovid's father had made a country with fair and just courts and a thriving economy... But to rule , there is a level of ruthlessness needed. All three have that, and even if Ciri ruled there would be that element too. In the dark ages, ruthlessness was needed. (I don't like it at all, so let's all be grateful we don't live in those times)
So, long and short of it is. I choose Dijkstra now, it is the best for the North and the worst for Emhyr... I am still upset with CDPR for making me make this choice, but I can't EVER let the scum that is Emhyr win. [Dispite being voiced by Charles Dance]
There is no black and white choice in this matter. It's all grey. Dijkstra implied similar (if not the same) tactics as Nilfgaard did. He industralized the North at the cost of his subjects will → if you explore White Orchard at the very end of the game storyline during quest Something ends, something begins you can find redanian soldiers brutally taking over peasants wheat farms, stealing the livestock for free without paying a single compensation to owners(peasants even say something like:"Nilfgaardians had atleast paid us something!") and increased taxes by double the amount.
And also, what happens when Dijkstra dies? He is in his 50's. Radovid has claim for royal descendants while Dijkstra does not. Same for Emhyr. Unless Dijkstra marries one of Radovids sisters there is going to be a bloody war for the throne for the Northern Empire.
I do wonder who rules Temeria even though they are a client state. Is it the young lady from Witcher 2.
Emhyr does and then Ciri if you make her Empress. The fate of Annais, the Foltests daughter, is unknown. But I have my hopes up for her to rule!
If Ciri is a witcher it is explained that lord Dagborg rules over White Orchard province. So it seems like it will stay the same way as before when Foltest died → Temeria divided into provinces ruled by dukes and noblemans.
If Radovid rules: 1. the north will prosper as a nation and the southern realms will be conquered as well. 2. All your non-human and sorcerer(ess) friends will die/except for the lodge. 3. The prosperity of the north through Radovid would mean that humans would hate witchers even more than normal and all will start believing in the eternal fire ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.
I personally hate Radovid and would not make him the ruler of all lands.
If Dijkstra rules: 1. the north will prosper and conquer the south. 2. Non-humans and sorcerer(ess) will all be safe and counted as equals (Dijkstra but probably not for the general public/small-town people). 3. this prosperity will come at the price of sacrifices from Dijkstra's own men and public... to elaborate, he will sit in a cozy chair and plot notoriously for the good of his nation while not giving a ♥♥♥♥ about the consequences on his subjects.
I think Dijkstra, for the nation's future, would be a good ruler as the north WILL prosper 100%. However, he will do so at the cost of simple folk, maybe even someone like Geralt or the lodge (as he doesn't give a ♥♥♥♥ about the consequences) and this means that morally he would be a terrible ruler.
If Emhyr rules: 1. The south will rule all and prosper as a nation. 2. Temaria will be something like Australia under the British. 3. Ciri may or may not rule the world. 4. While Emhyr is a douchebag and I do not like him very much, I respect the ♥♥♥♥ out of him, he brought Nilfgaard from filth to the most feared army/nation in the world. Nilfgaard used to be ♥♥♥♥ but through Emhyr's rule it prospered to be the strongest army ever seen (apart from the hunt of course). I make this point because it proves that if Emhyr does rule the world (until Ciri takes over), there is bound to be prosperity and happiness in the nation. 5. Emhyr does care for his subjects. When we first meet him, he, during war time, is still tending to his subjects' needs. He is a good king, both literally and morally. 6. Non-humans and sorcerer(ess) will all be equals.
In my opinion, Emhyr is the best option as he is a fair emperor who actually cares for his nation and its people. He also truly cares for Ciri which means he will respect Geralt and friends and not meddle in their lives. Lastly, if you want, Ciri can become empress! Which means their will be a ruler who knows etiquettes, politics and war strategies as well as human decency (she has lived on the streets and knows what's up), this means that she would be the perfect ruler for the world (similar to Cerys for Skellige).
So to sum up (if you do not care whether north or south rules and only care about prosperity of the nation and people): Radovid=bad, Dijkstra=neutral, Emhyr/Ciri=good.
Hope this helped