How do your answers in the Vizima interview change the game?

[thayanora]

I'm curious. I know the big changes, like how if you said you killed Letho you obviously won't run into him later, or if you killed Aryan his mom doesn't like you much. But I didn't notice much different whether you sided with Iorveth or Roche (although I did accidentally refuse the whole Sigi/Radovid quest in Novigrad so I didn't really talk to Roche much), which seemed weird since that was the big decision in Witcher 2.
So someone who's played the different options want to weigh in? I'm curious but I'm not so curious I want to go back and replay the whole game with each possible answer combination. I picked the answers randomly at first, because I started this game before W2, but now that I actually know what they were talking about I'm all invested in these plotlines.

[ThatRabidPotato]

It doesn't change the game. At all. It's one of Witcher 3's (actually the whole series, they pulled this ♥♥♥♥ in Witcher 2 as well) greatest flaws. Your choices from previous games have no meaningful impact at all. There's no point to importing a save.

[thayanora]

Well, this is a letdown then. So is there not even any superficial dialogue impact? No "I have a hard time trusting you since you left me to die as a statue" or "you owe me because that time you joined my elven terrorist archenemy instead of being my bro"?

It's odd that they decided to make it in question form. if they wanted to nod to the previous games, but didn't want the answers to do anything, you'd think they could've explained how the status quo has been restored since W2 in response to your actions, at least. (example: "So at Loc Muinne, you saw how the Lodge of Sorcercesses tried to take over everything. Did you save Saska from them?" "Yes/no" "Well, too bad your choice meant nothing, she's dead now anyways.")
So then returning players wouldn't be constantly watching for references and new players wouldn't feel intimidated by not having tried the previous games.

[ThatRabidPotato]

Originally posted by thayanora:

Well, this is a letdown then. So is there not even any superficial dialogue impact? No "I have a hard time trusting you since you left me to die as a statue" or "you owe me because that time you joined my elven terrorist archenemy instead of being my bro"?

It's odd that they decided to make it in question form. if they wanted to nod to the previous games, but didn't want the answers to do anything, you'd think they could've explained how the status quo has been restored since W2 in response to your actions, at least. (example: "So at Loc Muinne, you saw how the Lodge of Sorcercesses tried to take over everything. Did you save Saska from them?" "Yes/no" "Well, too bad your choice meant nothing, she's dead now anyways.")
So then returning players wouldn't be constantly watching for references and new players wouldn't feel intimidated by not having tried the previous games.

That's partly the reason they didn't. They want to leave it deliberately ambiguous so everyone can make his own head canon. Which is very common and very stupid.

For example, I took Roche's path and saved Anais. She is not mentioned either way. Which allows me to head canon that she was evacuated from Vizima and her fate now hangs on how the war ends.
I'd prefer they gave a straight answer, but I see the logic.

[thayanora]

Originally posted by ThatRabidPotato:

Originally posted by thayanora:

Well, this is a letdown then. So is there not even any superficial dialogue impact? No "I have a hard time trusting you since you left me to die as a statue" or "you owe me because that time you joined my elven terrorist archenemy instead of being my bro"?

It's odd that they decided to make it in question form. if they wanted to nod to the previous games, but didn't want the answers to do anything, you'd think they could've explained how the status quo has been restored since W2 in response to your actions, at least. (example: "So at Loc Muinne, you saw how the Lodge of Sorcercesses tried to take over everything. Did you save Saska from them?" "Yes/no" "Well, too bad your choice meant nothing, she's dead now anyways.")
So then returning players wouldn't be constantly watching for references and new players wouldn't feel intimidated by not having tried the previous games.

That's partly the reason they didn't. They want to leave it deliberately ambiguous so everyone can make his own head canon. Which is very common and very stupid.

For example, I took Roche's path and saved Anais. She is not mentioned either way. Which allows me to head canon that she was evacuated from Vizima and her fate now hangs on how the war ends.
I'd prefer they gave a straight answer, but I see the logic.

I would see the logic more if they didn't make "your choices super matter!" one of the biggest selling points of the game. And, y'know, either commit to making the answers matter, or don't ask the questions IMO, don't pretend that doing both works.

[ThatRabidPotato]

Originally posted by thayanora:

Originally posted by ThatRabidPotato:

That's partly the reason they didn't. They want to leave it deliberately ambiguous so everyone can make his own head canon. Which is very common and very stupid.

For example, I took Roche's path and saved Anais. She is not mentioned either way. Which allows me to head canon that she was evacuated from Vizima and her fate now hangs on how the war ends.
I'd prefer they gave a straight answer, but I see the logic.

I would see the logic more if they didn't make "your choices super matter!" one of the biggest selling points of the game. And, y'know, either commit to making the answers matter, or don't ask the questions IMO, don't pretend that doing both works.

I agree it's horribly bungled and is one of the biggest downsides of the game. I'm just saying that's part of the thought process.

[orthostatic]

This thread confirms a sneaking suspicion I've had that the Iorveth vs. Roche choice appears to mean absolutely nothing in a W3 run. I kept choosing Roche during W2 "simulation" since I like his character, but this time I chose Iorveth and .. no difference at all that I can see. A bit of a let-down, seeing as how there's a ton of room for more story-telling there.

[ThatRabidPotato]

Originally posted by BuzzardBee:

Originally posted by thayanora:

I would see the logic more if they didn't make "your choices super matter!" one of the biggest selling points of the game. And, y'know, either commit to making the answers matter, or don't ask the questions IMO, don't pretend that doing both works.

The questions themselves are merely a means of "simulating" the W2 world state for the game, specifically concerning Letho's appearance or lack thereof, Sile's appearance and Aryan's mother's disposition towards you. Period. The other two questions honestly could and probably should have been omitted. Then again they may have at one point actually pointed to content that was altered in the game but later discarded due to time constraints. We'll never know the answer to that.

I take it Louisa La Valette doesn't like you if you killed Aryan? Hilarious how his name doesn't come up either way and she doesn't care about her daughter, the Queen of Temeria. Epic fail by CDPR in such an overall great game.

[thayanora]

Originally posted by BuzzardBee:

Yeah, poor illegitimate Anais. No love for her at all.

They put more effort into referencing Odrin than they did about Anais.

[ThatRabidPotato]

Originally posted by thayanora:

Originally posted by BuzzardBee:

Yeah, poor illegitimate Anais. No love for her at all.

They put more effort into referencing Odrin than they did about Anais.

This is hilarious and infuriating at the same time.

[TheLostGhost]

Nobody mentioned journal entries? or do they not change based on choices?