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
That is revealed at the end of Witcher 2.
However, I think that is a horribly lame plot twist. Elves aren't scary at all. They should have made them be demons from Hell, or something like that.
They are ELVES because that is what they are in the BOOKS.
And the murderer in Friday the 13th was just somebody's mommy, not scary at all ugh... Boo hoo
Well then, the games should have corrected that and made them into something much better.
Just like the games corrected the major fubar of Geralt being dead in the books. They could have also corrected the major fubar of the Wild Hunt being lame non-scary elves in the exact same way.
That plot twist turns the Wild Hunt from a menace that they are intended to be into a non-threatening comedy clown show that they are not intended to be.
Exactly! Well-said. If I had made the original post here, then I would mark that quoted post as the solution to it.
And if you played Witcher 1 and 2, then you'd be familiar with the leader of the elves, who is like a reincarnation of Steve Urkel, only somehow he is even more annoying than Urkel! I never thought that would be possible until Witcher 1 and 2 made it happen.
So that extremely annoying & lame elf leader character just makes the Wild Hunt, being elves that they are, into even more a joke.
Witcher 2 and 3 making Wild Hunt into lame & comical elves is the exact opposite: a textbook example of how not to make a good, gripping scary villain.
Nope, I don't, and I criticize Ubisoft games real hard too. I have plenty of problems with AC Odyssey. I find it hilarious every time a certain poster says I "love" Odyssey or thinks it angers me when he insults it. I don't love it, and I couldn't care less if he insults that game. It deserves a lot of the criticisms it gets, and I fully agree with much of the criticisms it gets.
In the books, Sapkowski hinted that he was not dead and/or would be revived.
The wild hunt are ruthless and incredibly deadly. They tear through elite Nilfgardian soldiers and Skellige's warriors with equal ease.
If anything, the fact that they are just part of an army adds to their fear factor. A single brigade of cavalry from this world managed to inspire supernatural terror across the entirety of the world the game is set in. The skelligers believe they herald the end of the world. It makes it absolutely clear, without even needing to say it, that if they succeeded in invading the witcher's world in numbers the war would be very, very short.
Demon's from hell would be a dull, lazy, generic villain.
Witcher 3 doesn't have a rich or gripping story. What is it, 12 hours of character/dialogues/cutscenes/story content? In a 250+ hour game? So that calculates to 4.8% story content, and 95.2% not story, padding filler content.
Far Cry 3 has much more dynamic character interactions & character presentation than Witcher 3 does. For example, in Far Cry 3 the characters move around while they are talking to you, and touch you, and move their limbs in interesting ways, and things like that; whereas in Witcher 3 the characters mostly just stand idle in one spot whilst Geralt also stands idle in one spot for the entirety of most conversations.
AC Odyssey has much better facial details & animations than Witcher 3 does, so that makes its conversations/story aspects much better-presented than are its counterparts in Witcher 3.
I'm not say Odyssey has a great story, but I'm just saying its story presentation is better done than is Witcher 3's story presentation.
And I can't think anything about Witcher 3's story or characterization that is better than Odyssey's. Other than Odyssey having a better visual presentation of its characters, both games seem to be exactly on par with each other in terms of having not-very-good characterization or story.
And anyway, the comment was about Vaas specifically, not Far Cry 3 as a whole game (even though it's better than Witcher 3 as a whole game anyway). Vaas is definitely a much more gripping & menacing & memorable & interesting & unique villain than the Wild Hunt are.
Of course they need to scary. That is clearly intended to be their main trait, even though they aren't scary at all, in large part due to the incredibly lame plot twist that they are just elves.
Demons from Hell would certainly be less dull, and lazy, and generic than elves are.
And besides, since when does Witcher 3 care about not being dull, lazy and generic? Case in point: just read the plot summary right here on Steam's store page:
That's the most lazy, generic, dull, cliched plot imaginable.
What exactly is not scary about them? They are elves. They bring to mind gentle forest creatures, and also the incredibly annoying clown Iorveth from Witcher 1 and 2, who as I previously mentioned, is somehow even more obnoxious and lame than Steve Urkel.
Not to mention the fact that Eredin's voice sounds like he's cosplaying human dressed up in a furry suit who just spent $2,000 on a voice changer so that he could feel like a tough guy while wearing his $3,000 furry suit.
I.e. he sounds almost like this guy (warning: he swears a lot):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VavCPABkCRM
Not to also mention the fact that the Wild Hunt stalk Geralt quite a lot in Witcher 1, but ultimately fail to do anything to him, which indicates they are not very competent.