The opinions here are like people saying they don’t want to play as Zero in Megaman X4 because it was clunky in X3. Chill out, they are not copy pasting it for a dedicated game.
I’ve said it many times before but Letho would be my pick. Very nuanced character, big protagonist energy, CDPR original content so they don’t have to worry about lore as much. Also an even better character than Geralt if you want to really lean into the morally grey side of the Witcher universe.
I definitely see parts of it - at least narratively - but I think having Ciri as a full protagonist poses a lot of problems. Either you have to explain away her powers somehow - or you lean into it and end up with moving away from the Witcheriness. You’ll have no Witcher senses, no potions, no signs and instead have a bunch of magic (not to mention teleportation and time travel).
yeah I don’t really see either of those options as problematic. quite common to explain away powers in RPG sequels, and CDPR might very well want to go in a different gampleay direction than Witcher combat.
That’s fair. I think - behind a new customisable Witcher protagonist - Ciri is most likely simply because of name recognition and the value it carries into promoting the game.
One thing I loved about the original three games - through save importing you could have a line of unbroken continuity (with only a few strange abrupt departures from the narrative… #TeamShani)
Letho is too cool to be killed, such a great character in my opinion. Plus he took care of Yen, you know, and he had his reasons - even if he got a bit naively manipulated. Loved the conversation with him at the end, sharing a drink.
The unbroken continuity is cool, though I think very few things carry over all the way from 1 to 3? I know there is the tattoo, probably something else too.
I'd hope a "faceless" character like V in Cyberpunk that you can customize to your liking. I always struggle with RPGs that have predefined characters, because they often kinda go against what in my mind would be a possible personification in that world, and that potential clash makes me struggle with immersing myself in it.
For me it’s the exact opposite, I’d rather play a pre made story with a premade central character because otherwise it’s this hollow “just spend some time” thing.
I’m hoping for an original character. Original story. Don’t shit on established lore. But don’t cling to it like a zealot to a holy book. CDPR has proven they can tell an original story with original characters while respecting established lore.
We know from that one picture we’ve seen it’s not gonna be an established school. Perhaps an offshoot of the Cat. Or maybe an entirely different school. That medallion was a Lynx.
Not the entire upper and middle management which would save oodles more money if they slim down huge portions of that, nevermind not impact their productivity (much) and actually “reset” the part of the company that is responsible for their current woes.
Always the same thing. Upper management screws up, destroys the trust of the customers. The shares drop, shareholders are not happy. How do you restore share value? Layoff the people who did nothing wrong.
This whole system is rotten to the core.
Oh and I forgot: don’t call it layoff, call it reset, pursuit of agility, refocus…
I’m pretty sure that you generally can’t do that, in the US at least.
A C-level officer is required generally to act in the best interest of the company, but as long as the genuinely think that what they were doing was an attempt to improve the company in some way, you’d be hard-pressed to ever prove that they weren’t acting in the best interest. You’d have to find physical proof that they were intentionally sabotaging the company, and (probably) no one who is smart enough to become a CEO is going to do that.
I tend to agree with you, and he probably thought he was acting in the company’s best interests, but I also think there’s an argument to be made that he was negligent in doing his market research to ostensibly prevent what transpired.
Additionally, this wasn’t his first time toying with that “pay to buy, pay to use” model. He’d expressed past desires to implement that model, so it could be argued that this was his pet project that he wanted to see happen, and his hubris blinded him to the dangers.
Again, I don’t necessarily think that he wasn’t overly involved in pursuing this direction, but unless it’s proven in court, no one can sue him for losing their job over it.
I can’t talk on this personally because I do still really need this job’s insurance and am trying my best to not get fired for 6 more months, but also I’m just a grunt all I’ve got are contradictory rumors.
yahoo.com
Gorące