[MM360]

We just created another poll on our Facebook page. This time we want you to tell us about that one critical decision from Act I. Did you choose Iorveth or Vernon Roche? What made you pick one over the other? Make sure to head to our Facebook page and cast your vote in the poll as well! Also don't forget to mention motives behind your choice in the comments below!

 

 

 

 

 

[Uda-Maun]

I haven't had time to play the game much past the choice - (died 1st time fighting Letho) - but my choice was my own personal view that with Geralt stating earlier that he didn't like bullies and Roche definitely being a bully type...
I know that Iorveth comes across that way too, but I get the impression it's more about the racist views of others that he is "bullish" against. I could be proved wrong later in the game of course.

[Corylea]

I don't do Facebook, so you'll have to add to your totals from the comments section here.

The first time I played TW2, I didn't know that I was picking a side for Chapter 2 when asked to choose to go to one place or the other, and what Roche wanted to do sounded more crucial than what Iorveth wanted to do, so I went with him.

The second time around, when I knew I was picking a side, I chose Iorveth, partly because I like Vergen way better than Henselt's camp, partly because having to play as Henselt makes me feel like I need to wash my hands afterwards , and partly because I don't really like the Blue Stripes people except for Ves, whereas I've adored the dwarves since the TW1 days.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Vernon Roche.
Since my Geralt's primary motivation is to clear his name, he didn't think it was a good idea to side with Scoia'tael, specifically Iorveth who participated in Foltest's assassination. Furthermore, the Blue Stripes in the person of Roche has solid contacts and can help my Geralt clear his name easier. In addition, he trusted Roche, having known him longer, but did not fully trust Iorveth.

Also it's ideological. While my Geralt sympathizes with the nonhumans and even with the Socia'Tael to an extent. He did not agree with their methods and at the time, he was not fully aware of what Iorveth intended to do in Upper Aedirn. That said, he does hold some form of respect towards Iorveth.

From a meta-gaming point of view, Roche is my canon path because I really enjoy the bromance Geralt develops with Roche, and I prefer the grittiness of his path, as well as the politics involved (which is not to say that Iorveth's path didn't have politics). I really enjoyed exploring Henselt (great character), Dethmold, talk more with Sile and fight Serrit and Auckes.

That said, I really really like Iorveth's path as well and it's very rare for a game to make me like 2 paths almost equally. And I love Iorveth.

[Duskey]

You can't even see the page if you're not a member of Facebook. Doing promotional stuff on a site that requires you to register and log in... tsk tsk tsk.

[Tohveli]

Vernon BROche, of course.

I have to say, he probably became my favorite charachter in the whole series.

[Costin Moroianu]

Roche. While I like Iorveth's path it just felt like a very weak reason to help him in Act I whereas it made perfect sense with Roche, I mean seriously Iorveth helped kill Foltest and tried to kill Geralt, why should I just trust him? Roche on the other hand helped Geralt by saving him.

I like working with the law as well instead of against it, and I am firmly against fighting racism with murder which is what the Scoia'Tel have been doing for years. I also liked Henselt a lot more then I liked Saskia and at least I am not railroaded into helping anyone on Roche's path unlike Iorveth's where I am forced to help Saskia for a cause I couldn't give a damn for.

[Kindo]

While I am in clear favour of Iorveth on a personal level, there's another important factor to take into consideration: That of Roche having gone out on a limb to help Geralt and offer him assistance in clearing his name. Suddenly siding with Iorveth for the rest of the game would be nothing if not an outright betrayal of a new-found friend. My canon Geralt offers his assistance to Roche in taking down Loredo, at the end of Chapter 1, it's as simple as that. Granted, he does not betray Iorveth to Roche, either. When he is asking for his sword back in order to defend himself, he sure as hell is going to get just that, and not a punch on the throat! Oh, the horrible unforeseen consequences, though...

[MM360]

Duskey said:

You can't even see the page if you're not a member of Facebook. Doing promotional stuff on a site that requires you to register and log in... tsk tsk tsk. ›››

Website requires you to log-in because it's age-gated. Also, you don't have to participate in the poll. You can comment here:)

[MM360]

Btw. Iorveth FTW!

[MarcAuron]

Vernon Roche. Mostly because I had at least the illusion of neutrality. And a neutral path was one of the things I missed from the first game. Iorweth at moments for me felt overshadowed by the Assassins, but prefer the locations of Iorweth's path.

[Corylea]

MM360 said:

Btw. Iorveth FTW!

›››

*smile*

[steelboned]

I have chosen Roche for two times and Ioverth for only one walk-through. I chose Roche because of further gameplay which I like a lot more than the one on the Ioverth`s path. And Roche appears to me as a more interesting one.

[Aver]

Vernon Roche because he has great personality. Also I like Temeria and with Roche I can help him make it stronger.

And there is romance with Ves. The only non-Triss romance with some background. I would love to see her in TW3.

[Kindo]

MarcAuron said:

Vernon Roche. Mostly because I had at least the illusion of neutrality. And a neutral path was one of the things I missed from the first game. Iorweth at moments for me felt overshadowed by the Assassins, but prefer the locations of Iorweth's path. ›››

Interesting. I think the ability to "remain neutral" is quite prominent in both games. In TW1, you can focus entirely on tracking down Salamandra (and the force(s) behind the organisation) in order to recover the witcher secrets and/or seek revenge. I never felt as if I was ever forced to meddle in other things, unless I really wanted to. It took me a while to see it in TW2, but it eventually became clear to me that sticking with Roche and then going for Triss when given the choice, manifested as a nicely "neutral" path.

[KnightofPhoenix]

MM360 said:

Btw. Iorveth FTW!

›››

He still looks unamused.



Bloede dwoine

[Mrowakus]

Costin Moroianu said:

Roche. While I like Iorveth's path it just felt like a very weak reason to help him in Act I whereas it made perfect sense with Roche, I mean seriously Iorveth helped kill Foltest and tried to kill Geralt, why should I just trust him? Roche on the other hand helped Geralt by saving him.

This, so many times this. Other than player being interested in an alternativre path, and perhaps feeling pitty for the Elves, there's no reason to help Iorveth. Roche proved trustworthy, reliable and honourbound. The only thing we know about Iorveth at this point is that he framed Geralt into murder of his benefactor. Why should Geralt even want to aid him, instead of sticking with Roche - a man he can surely trust?

If there was some valid reason e.g. Iorveth convincingly offering some intel on Geralt's past or Yennefer or even the conspiracy, then one would be faced with a serious dilemma: to stay along a good companion, or to follow a lead that might shed some light on the past and future events. Alas...

Roche is consistently good from the start - he is sharp, ingenious, and dedicated but also moody and gruff and prone to attacks of rage. A flawed character who seems very much alive.

To be fair - Iorveth isn't half-bad later on - he proves focused, reliable, uncharacteristically gentle and ponderous. One wishes, however, there was something about his quest that could really make Geralt stop and think about joining him, beyond emotional impact he might have. What we get now, is very contrived, and goes against sombre, logical analysis of your options that all of Sapkowski's works extol.

One of the two low parts in admittedly otherwise excellent narrative.

[Corylea]

Mrowakus said:

To be fair - Iorveth isn't half-bad later on, but one wishes there was something about his quest that could really make Geralt stop and think about joining him. What we get now, is very contrived.

One of the two low parts in admittedly otherwise excellent narrative. ›››

Yes! I'd love to see that choice re-worked so that Iorveth offers something that would appeal to Geralt as strongly as what Roche offers.

[paul_cz]

I went with Iorveth on my first playthrough. He made me sympathise with him despite his initially hostile behaviour, and he convinced me he was honorable.

And yes, he is a great character, and after second playthrough with Roche, I still prefer Iorveth, because his act gives lot of interactions with Saskia who is actually my favourite character in the game. Roche was a great bad ass and I liked his playthrough too, but Saskia is Saskia.

[Mrowakus]

paul_cz said:

I went with Iorveth on my first playthrough. He made me sympathise with him despite his initially hostile behaviour, and he convinced me he was honorable.

And yes, he is a great character, and after second playthrough with Roche, I still prefer Iorveth, because his act gives lot of interactions with Saskia who is actually my favourite character in the game. Roche was a great bad ass and I liked his playthrough too, but Saskia is Saskia. ›››

Admittedly, I prefer Iorveth's path as well - I liked quest structure there more.

But again, the lack of good reason to join him other than player feeling like it or not is unfortunately jarring.