#i dont need to explain geralt or regis. or do i. maybe i should. idk | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

gayregis · 5 years

Text

issues with blood & wine

cdpr litcherally took away all the development that vampires got in the book series, despite blood & wine adding more vampire lore, and ill explain how

retcons & just weird differences from canon

blood & wine paints vampires as this big evil secret society and civilization whereas in the books they literally do not have more society than “a bunch of frat guys and sorority girls getting wasted every full moon”

the vampire lore they added with mentions and/or demonstrations of human cattle, bloodthirst as a form of torture, the hierarchy with unseen elders, drinking blood being seen as something much darker and sinister all together instead of a vice of vampires like alcoholism is a vice to humanity, and the whole dumbass retcon about the conjunction of the spheres.

the views on blooddrinking introduced in blood & wine lead to annoyingly misplaced dialogue with geralt and regis like geralt mentioning vampires “treating humans like cattle to slaughter” which, they dont, and which geralt learned in baptism of fire, then remarking disapprovingly that humans are more like an open bar then. this dialogue makes no sense even because that’s NOT how vampires in the witcher function

regis’s torture in la cage au fou is just basically torture porn and is pretty unnecessary. but it’s also overdone because it’s not like regis has been sober for centuries, he broke his sobriety at stygga and therefore has only been sober for 8 years, which... he spent dead. so the temptation of relapse would already be an issue for him, which should have provided enough tension and angst for all of us. the scene in la cage au fou also depicts such a visceral pain of bloodlust and doesn’t show WHY it’s such a widespread temptation and vice for vampires... which imo would be more powerful as both a plot point and statement

side note: not vampire related but geralt and regis literally dont talk about the hansa at all and it annoys me because regis seems depressed for No Specific Reason besides dettlaff’s situation when we know that he and geralt experienced great loss at stygga and are struggling to cope with that

side side note: considering regis broke his sobriety at stygga and could be struggling with thoughts of relapse already, knowing that he’s depressed about the loss of milva angouleme and cahir could provide for some more angst and tension :/

the vampire claws are ugly and not lore-friendly. why not just give them short claws on their hands. when regis and other vampires fight in the books, they barely use their claws anyways. they turn invisible, turn into bats, scream, etc.

the smoke/fog effect annoys me because there’s no mention of that in the books, only of them turning invisible. and you can SEE smoke/fog so tell me what is the point

the op-ness of vampires bothers me because vampires were already op in the books and making them moreso just is annoying because it’s unbalanced. i guess this is partially due to an issue in the books where sapkowski never explained how a vampire could truly be killed, but my interpretation is that sapkowski intended to portray regis as “truly killed” at the end of the series, just obliterated beyond his regenerative ability within the near centuries... i mean it took him half a century to grow back a head, how long would it take him to regenerate his entire body? forever, which is pretty akin to ‘death.’ there wasn’t a need to add social rules about vampires killing vampires because... vampires could ‘die’. but cdpr introduced dettlaff regrowing his hand within like, 3 days, and that was that. i don’t disagree with some of the regenerative things depicted, like regis regenerating after dettlaff spears him lol, that was pretty cool and reminiscent of the battle of the bridge where he regenerated from an arrow piercing in about 2 minutes. but for things more severe than flesh wounds........ i can’t support that because it’s too unrealistic given the canon from the books

i like dettlaff’s monster form, i really do, but seeing as how the books say that vampires turn into BATS............................. i guess it is said that all vampires are unique and have different powers, but come on, what is that, that is not even bat-like, or MAYBE do something with the MOTH aesthetic he was given?? he should have had like, locust powers or something cool, come on....

speaking of animal affinities, this is really nitpicky at this point lol, but regis’s corvids not being shown as birds of omen or some dark motif and instead as just General Helpers......... when they attack stygga in lady of the lake, the birds crowd the fort and circle around it, causing the guards outside to all stir and worry about what ill fate is to befall them. it’s intended to be super creepy and worrying. iirc when regis was around corvids also tended to perch in the trees, sort of ominously signaling that he was around... in blood & wine they’re good boys and i love them, but they’re not entirely creepy enough. think of how regis’s gwent card depicts the corvids as an example of a step in the right direction. what im saying basically is less doctor doolittle and more the birds, please.

honorable mention is regis’s hairline and facial hair. baptism of fire described him as looking middle-aged, so he should look around 45. that is all

the conjunction retcons introduced are just confusing and annoying. regis remarks about the vampires’ “home” wistfully multiple times throughout blood & wine, AS IF he actually saw it at one point. our boy’s like, 400 something years old (436, but who’s counting), so he was born in the 800s (bc the witcher saga and games take place in 1260 something). he’s fucking young compared to someone like the unseen elder, or even for example, AVALLAC’H, who’s older than him by like 2 centuries. the conjunction of the spheres occurred 1500 YEARS BEFORE THE SAGA & GAMES TAKE PLACE, in 200s BCE which is MORE THAN 3 TIMES REGIS’S AGE. so it makes no sense for regis to be talking about the vampires’ homeland before the conjunction because (if regis is considered middle aged by vampire standards) he’s like, 3rd or 4th-generation vampire.

depiction of vampires

i will say that orianna and blood simple was a good move because it shows how vampires’ addictions can manifest in ways other than raiding villages as youth... though i would have liked to see orianna shown as middle aged looking like regis is i’ll let that slide because i know cdpr can’t show a woman who is supposed to come off as attractive looking more than 30 years old

but the strictness of vampire society imposed in blood & wine, through the no killing vampires laws, tesham mutna’s whole hierarchy and structure, is inaccurate in my opinion because in the books the whole THING about the vampires is that while they’re highly intelligent and emotional, they don’t really form social structure beyond drinking parties, which i think was both a nice step away from classic “stuffy manor vampire” types and something unique for the witcher universe...

my biggest issue, though, is with dettlaff and his characterization throughout blood & wine, or should i say, lack of consistent characterization. half of the “good things” dettlaff does isn’t even shown (i.e., resurrecting regis) and is rather explained through word, so the effect on the player isn’t as big. his actual caring and protectiveness of rhenawedd/syanna is overshadowed by syanna’s huge arc about her own backstory so there’s like, NO empathy built up for dettlaff. you actually get to talk to syanna about her opinions and takes, but as for dettlaff you’re relying on regis’s secondhand guessing about his brother’s emotions. regis is also somewhat of an unreliable narrator because it’s not like he can predict everything that will happen... as much as it seems it, sometimes

but the whole point of the books dealing with vampires (and more specifically, regis) was to show that sometimes monsters are more reliable and morally upright than humans. im not saying every vampire in the witcher series should be shown as a paragon of morality, because that’s definitely not the case. but i think for a player who has just met regis, just learned about the vampires in the witcher universe, they need more context and more depictions of Good Vampires, or at least, Vampires That Employ Logic, in order to accept that vampires are NOT some savage beasts like anna and damien argue.

it also doesn’t help with... how regis is depicted. regis is always shown in his humanoid form when he’s proper and kind and geralt is friendly with him, and when he’s in a more bestial form during la cage au fou and tesham mutna, he’s shown as like, a danger [[to geralt]], which is such a slap in the face when you consider how regis and geralt fought side by side at stygga. to even think that regis is somehow untrustworthy tbh literally goes against everything in the books -- in the saga, regis is depicted as yes, a very powerful being, but one that has deep intelligence, emotions, and alliances to geralt and the hansa... when he uses his powers and fights in the saga, it was not only rare, but only ever for Good, to save ciri and yennefer. and he was completely in control of himself and his powers... even when drunk at stygga. not to mention regis was even a self-described ‘coward’ and felt it necessary to avoid battle and conflict because he disliked it so. so when in blood & wine, regis fights during capture the castle like it’s nothing, that’s so alien to his character, idk how to even describe it. he just brushes it off like “looked like you needed a hand, we thought we’d stop by” instead of like, whoa. this is a big sacrifice he’s making by putting himself into this conflict, because he loathes violence. of course there’s also the issue with la cage au fou where regis is shown as Bestially Untrustworthy because he Can’t Control His Powers but those issues have already been discussed.........

also it’s tiring how it’s lazily attempted to explain that vampires aren’t just horrific thirsty beasts of the night and then toussaint is sacked by vampires like a week later. the showing was more impactful than the telling here

back to dettlaff’s inconsistent characterization, it’s annoying how he doesn’t get a chance to explain his thoughts and worries and grievances like syanna does, but also it’s annoying how he’s shown as such a caring person for those he loves (asking syanna if shes okay, feeling guilty that he couldnt rescue her sooner, regretting not being there for her...) but then when he’s betrayed he immediately goes to “sack the city until i can murder this bitch” which is like...... okay, i get it, scorpio vibes, but it doesn’t really make sense without some kind of dialogue between dettlaff and geralt. the player would have to stop and really mull this logic over (it does make sense, but you have to think about it... dettlaff would want to murder syanna because she had him murder those close to him anyways, and dettlaff didn’t know (and never finds out, actually) that the knights were bad people deserving of death anyways). i feel like if dettlaff knew the reality about the knights, then he wouldn’t want to murder syanna....... he would be mad that she didnt communicate with him in the first place, but at least he wouldnt be assuming that he murdered innocents. from dettlaff’s perspective, syanna is a killer who killed some of his best friends, but as the player, we never get to even interact with him or his feelings about the subject. instead we’re faced with an unnecessary dichotomy between the two of them which ends in tears and bloodshed either way, and it’s unsatisfying.

#thoughts #tw3 #bw #regis #dettlaff #omfg big fucking rant goodbye lol #i spent like an hour writing this all out o h my god

8 notes · View notes