Game EXP: The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Enhanced Edition (PC)

So after 49 hours and 10 minutes, I finished The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings Enhanced Edition through GOG's Galaxy client back on the first of this month.  Within the hour, I then booted up The Witcher III: Wild Hunt on my Nintendo Switch and started in on that little 170+ hour game without a glance back.  What I should have done was sit down and put down my recent thoughts into words like I am doing now, but this will have to suffice.  And because I am going to be talking about key events that take place in The Witcher 2, you should expect there to be spoilers coming.  And I apologize for the length of this article as I did try my best to keep in condensed, but since we go into the reason for the key decisions I made in the game, I felt that I needed to give context to those decisions which lead down a Nekker hole or eight.

I started playing The Witcher 2 back in November and gave my First Impressions shortly thereafter.  At that time, I was still a little unsure about a lot of things, primarily the story and where it was going, as well as the new updated combat system.  I can tell you now that by the end of the game, I was full in on both in most respects (throwing daggers/bombs I still found myself rarely doing as targeting was odd, to say the least).  Because this is a Game EXP article and not a full-on review article, I am going to pass over a lot, but since this game was originally released back in 2012, there is not a lot of analysis that I can add.

One of the great aspects of The Witcher 2 is that there are key choices that Geralt of Rivia is forced to make throughout the game that drastically changes how the entire story is played out.  These choices have effects on the overall narrative, both in a micro and a macro sense.  Exposing an Elf who has been leading soldiers to their death might give Geralt a negative influence on his dealings with other Elves throughout the first half of the game, while deciding to side with Vernon Roche over Iorveth will lead to an entirely different Act II and how those events unfold in Act III.  I have no doubt that I could decide to side with Iorveth and experience a 60% different game.  What makes these decisions great is that at the time, they might seem inconsequential but have a dramatic effect on the narrative that can not be predicted at that moment.  Not only is that great storytelling, in my own opinion, but it also fits well in the world of The Witcher where Geralt is presented with often ambiguous choices that are never as simple as good vs. evil.

So instead of rehashing the entire game, let us just focus on some of the key decisions I made that helped shape the narrative of the story and how I played the game overall.

Probably Shouldn't Trust Demons.  Especially When They Look Like This.

First off, I failed three quests.  The first was in the beginning of the game where I was tasked with rescuing citizens from the burning city within La Valette Castle.  As I was just starting out in the game, I thought that there was an unofficial time requirement and that time was of the essence, so I rescued what citizens I could discover and then moved on into the next area.  I was also not too familiar with how the mini-map functioned in this game so I know that I could have used it better and saved all those who needed saving.  The second quest involved a Kaedweni soldier named Odrin who had wandered off drunk and I was tasked with bringing him back to camp.  I apparently made some bad dialogue options, pissed Odrin off, and he left.  The last was another Kaedweni soldier named Mavrick who believed that he was cursed.  After what seemed to be a thorough investigation, I took the word of a spectre over Mavrick (because I tend to believe that humans who have been cursed are trash in video games), which lead to a vengeful demonic entity killing Mavrick and then Geralt banishing said entity.

I decided to let these decisions play out instead of restarting from a previous save because I liked the idea that Geralt may not always make the correct choice.  I like the idea that he is a fallible character and that even with all the information he is able to gather, his decision could unintentionally hurting someone else.  Sure I could have reloaded so that I could gain more EXP, but I liked the way that the story played out.  Kind of.  Plus, with the case of Mavrick, the decision to tell him that I did not believe him which lead to his death had happened a good 30 minutes before I discovered him dead, so restarting from a previous save file just seemed tedious.

Helping Aryan La Valette to Safety.

As for the main important decisions in the game, I tried to put myself in Geralt's headspace and role-played my decisions instead of choosing what I might choose as an outside observer.  First, I decided to let Aryan La Valette live after the siege of La Valette Castle.  Once the cutscene after the battle finished, I convinced Aryan to lay down his sword, mainly because as a Witcher, I felt that Geralt had no point in killing him.  He agreed to lay down his arms, the siege was over, and he would be thrown in prison.  Then after Geralt himself was thrown in prison, I ran into Aryan again who looked to have committed an act of self-sacrifice, allowing Geralt to escape in turn while he provided a distraction by blowing himself up, collapsing part of the prison and the castle above.

I Mean, We Stopped a Corrupt Ballista, That's Gotta Count For Something.

During this prison break due to Vernon Roche's apparent fondness for Geralt, I decided to side with him over Ivoreth when the choice presented itself about 2/3rds of the way through the storyline in Flotsam.  By that point, I had been working quite a bit with Vernon Roche and felt that he and Geralt were working well together and I had not done anything that would have made me question his motives.  I know he was viewed badly by the Scoia'tael, but I still felt that Geralt owed Vernon for helping him escape execution at La Valette Castle.  Vernon had also helped me cast light on the atrocities committed by the local mayor and his thugs and turning on Vernon would have been out of the blue, at least the way that I had been playing.  I know that there are events that unfold differently depending on the choices you make throughout Flotsam, but for me, I did not experience anything that made me question Vernon as a character.

The Gang's All Here!  Except Dandelion.  And Zoltan.  And Triss.  And Yen.

In the second half of the game, when Geralt, Vernon, Ves, and the rest Blue Stripes (essentially a special forces unit from Temeria) arrived at the Kaedweni Camp of King Henselt and his sorcerer Deathmold (really!?) I was presented with a quest that felt like part of an entirely new story that I had not been connected to.  Part of Geralt's self-imposed Witcher Code is to help people dispel curses, even if the person who was cursed is trash (eg King Henselt), so having to do this as part of the main quest seemed a little annoying, but this whole section was because Geralt was trying to find out where Triss Merigold had disappeared to through the portal in Síle de Tansarville's room in Flotsam; Síle had helped Geralt fight a giant Kayran that was causing problem with traders and merchants in Flotsam.  But I digress.  The key decision in this section was during the siege of Vergen, and preceding the siege was King Henselt and Dethmold capturing and killing the entirety of the Blue Stripes (while Vernon and Geralt were on an information-gathering mission) and raping Ves.  During the siege, Geralt and Vernon come upon Henselt and you are given the option to have either Geralt or Vernon kill him for his transgressions, or to let him live.  Based on Vernon's reactions earlier to finding the bodies of the Blue Stripes and the rape of Ves, I saw Vernon being the one to kill Henselt more than Geralt to be the appropriate choice.  But this choice did not come easily since the over-arching main story involved Geralt trying to track down another Witcher by the name of Letho of Gulet who had already killed two kings of the Northern Kingdoms, one of which being King Foltest of Temeria and by chance framing Geralt; hence why he was imprisoned at the beginning of the game.

Say What Now!?
(But Seriously Though, This Sorcerer's Outfit in On Point!!)

Following the Siege of Vergen, Geralt and Vernon headed to the old Elven city of Loc Muinne where the mages of the Northern Kingdoms were headed to hold a summit to determine the fate of The Continent, and it was believed that that was where Triss was as well.  This last act had the largest number of key decisions throughout the entire game.  I should also mention that in this area, I did use a walkthrough for a couple of quests, specifically "From a Bygone Era" where you had to take information from a translated book and apply that to a riddle from a floating visage blocking a doorway, and in the "Lilies and Vipers" where you had a limited number of attempts to create a potion from a riddle.  I did give each quest a number of attempts on my own first, but after a lot of failures, I decided that I would essentially cheat to finish these two.  

It was also in Loc Muinne that I started getting antsy for the end of the game, not that I was not enjoying the game or tired with where the story was going, I just found that after the large open areas of Flotsam and Vergen, being cloistered in the ruins of a city felt constricting.  Although, I think I only left The Gargoyle Contract left unfinished and in my defense, I had killed a lot of the Gargoyles there and could not locate anyone selling a book about Gargoyles to progress that questline.

As for the major choices in this third act, let us break them down one-by-one.

When given the choice between helping Roche save Anaïs La Valette (who had been captured in earlier events you hear about and investigate), or rescue Triss who was being held by the Nilfgaardians, I decided to save Triss.  This came about, partly because of the romantic relationship that I had established from The Witcher that carried over into this game.  I also felt that Roche was a competent fighter himself and that better to have one person rescue the Princess and one rescue Triss, rather than both going to rescue one.  What I liked about this decision, was that it provided a lot of context and exposition into the overall events and actions of Síle and a large but select number of sorcerers on The Continent when I brought Triss to the meeting in the amphitheater.

The next choice came when confronting Síle de Tansarville during her attempted escape from Loc Muinne.  While I was tempted to let her die, there was the moment when she offered information on the location of Yennefer, who Geralt had been searching for since he had been slowly recovering from his amnesia since the first game.  I felt that Geralt's feelings towards Yennefer would overpower his sense of justice towards letting Síle die, so I prevented her death, was told that Yennefer was in Nilfgaard, and let Síle escape.

Ah Jeez. . .

Skipping ahead to Geralt fighting the returning Dragon, I did decide in the end to kill it, but not because I wanted Geralt to kill a dragon, but because it had crashed and had a tree puncture its chest.  There was a scene with Geralt approaching the downed Dragon and I felt that leaving the Dragon impaled on this tree would lead it to an agonizing death.  Only after I started doing research for the article did I find out that this Green Dragon was in fact the offspring of the Golden Dragon Villentretenmerth, aka Borch Three Jackdaws.  There was also a lot that would have happened and additional information about the Green Dragon had I sided with Iorveth back in Flotsam, as well as a whole group of characters that I never interacted with because I sided with Vernon Roche.  But in this particular moment, I felt that putting the Green Dragon out of what appeared to me to be misery, felt like the right choice, and I appreciated that Geralt did show remorse and sorrow when he killed it.

I Actually Do Like Exposition.

The final choice was during the confrontation with Letho, the Witcher of the School of the Viper whose actions had caused the events of the game to take place.  When meeting Letho in one of the courtyards of Loc Muinne, I took every opportunity to learn an absurd amount of information from him.  Like, a stupid amount.  Like, this was a confession that lasted for nearly 20 minutes as I selected all of the dialogue options until the only two choices remaining were to either fight him or let him live.  There was something that Letho said during his conversation, that he never saw Geralt as his enemy, just that Geralt accidentally got in the way.  I also felt that Letho had been used by both the Lodge (new group/gathering of sorcerers lead by Síle had manipulated Letho to their own means.  I also felt that despite how powerful of a Witcher Geralt was (and the fact that I was playing on Easy difficulty) and by the Nilfgaardian Emperor, and that Letho was the more powerful of the two and probably could have killed Geralt were this not a video game.  Maybe Geralt had a brief spark of wanting to live after finding important information about Yennefer's location and decided that that would be the better choice than engaging in a fight that could very well get him killed.  Plus, I love the idea of going up against your adversary for the past 40 hours where you have a conversation instead of a fight and that is it.  No big boss battle sizing each other's genitals up (a la Lethal Weapon) at the end.  Unexpected, but not unwholey unwelcome.

Looking back on my journey with The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings, I am somewhat amused.  When I started, I was annoyed by what seemed to be an overly complicated combat system compared to the first game and that there was too much information thrown at the player all at once, even with the tutorial level, but by the end, possibly because I was playing on Easy, I felt comfortable engaging with enemies using the Witcher Signs and throwing Grapeshot at groups.  And in the process of writing this article, I am even more impressed with the amount of content in this game that I never experienced all because I sided with Vernon Roche instead of Iorveth.  I am highly considering replaying this game and siding with Iorveth (and possibly approaching Roche differently in the early game) and playing a 60%ish different narrative, and not because I feel like I have to, but because I want to.  And that is a great feeling.  But for the time being, I am continuing with a bearded Geralt of Rivia in the Northern Kingdoms in The Witcher III: Wild Hunt.



~JWfW/JDub/Cooking Crack/Jaconian
Another Way To Change My Mind