I want different quests to have an impact on each other. I really don't like Charlie Brown syndrome. (At the end of every Charlie Brown comic the world state goes back to what it was when the comic began.)

To me, it doesn't matter that much how big the world is. It's how you use the world that counts.

I also want a continuation to the very high standard of writing the games have had so far. I want moral ambiguity, and tough thoughtful C&C.

Also, all mod editors (including the coming RedKit) should come will tools needed to tell our own stories. It should be easy to create a dialogue montage for example. Storing the player's dialog choices should be exposed in a user readable manner. If I make a mod I want to be able to throw in a dll that reads some kind of human-readable output from the game. I also want the game to be able to call into my additional code and ask for input (e.g., the result of my c&c calculation based on dialogue that has taken place). I don't want to waste my time hacking the bowels of the game code to make a mod, otherwise I won't bother.

I've had the same problem ever since the patch that introduced 'dark mode' (I don't remember which one it was). The Kayran QTE used to be very easy, and now it's nearly impossible. I only manage to do it once in around 30 tries. Luckily, if you kill all four arms you can keep retrying without dying. It's complete BS and I wish the devs would do something about it, such as make QTE completely optional.

I'm guessing it doesn't cost much at all. That is, they've probably automated the scan. If they can do it once, they can do it a million times. It's just a matter of actually getting people's pics.

And, yeah, it's definitely an immersion enhancing bonus. I'd love to see thousands of NPCs that all look different and like actual people, instead of making them with Bioware-style face designer software or recycling like in TW1.

Fully agree. I especially disliked crossing the entire Visima and swamp maps just to get an extra line of dialogue. It takes away a lot of replay value.

Henselt is a bastard on a personal level, but he is also a competent ruler and everything he does as a king makes sense. Remember that it was Henselt who ordered the execution of Sabrina, who used the equivalent of a weapon of mass destruction on the battlefield. In other words, Henselt perferred to lose a battle than disobey an international law. There is something deeply noble about that, even if he is ruthless and a rapist. Henselt's potential successor might be less of jerk, but would he also have his priorities straight? Would he be a good king? Killing Henselt is a choice between siding with Geralt's friends Roche, Ves and the Blue Stripes versus perventing Aedirn from getting too weak in face of the Nilfgaardian invasion (also the goal of the Kingslayer). It's a tough choice, and it's interesting that the OP thought it was so clear cut.

I like how this choice ties in to the general theme of TW2. Is the villain the individual? (Letho? Henselt? ...Geralt playing "soldier boy" for Foltest?) Or is it mediaeval society? So that the individual gets caught up in the hierarchies, nationalities and conflicts fought for non-individual reasons. This, I think, is the choice Geralt has to make at the end of the game.