The reactionary women-hating alt-right gamer-gate neo-nazi losers should just be ignored at this point.
To be fair, this post is the first I’ve heard of people upset about it
I’ve never read the books, but… It was clear from game 3 that she was going to play an important role in the future. The entire plot of the main campaign in Witcher 3 was about HER powers. The Wild Hunt wanted her, not Geralt.
Plus also she’s awesome anyway. What the fuck is wrong with people? Oh I can’t enjoy my vibeo game with a wahmen as main character, it’ll ruin my mood!
Honestly I’d rather be looking at a cute girl dashing around than an old man, even if I identify more with the latter. Video games are for exploring things. Fantasy worlds, dragons, wraiths… And the biggest problem with suspending disbelief is playing a character who isn’t the same gender as the player? lmao.
Maybe I’m just not enough of a gamer. Only been two and a half decades or so since I first touched a computer and played games.
Plus also she’s awesome anyway. What the fuck is wrong with people? Oh I can’t enjoy my vibeo game with a wahmen as main character, it’ll ruin my mood!
That’s what I don’t understand, like, have people not played the Horizon games? They’re awesome, they’re fun as hell.
Also, Tomb Raider. One of the most well known videogame characters is literally an ass-kicking woman.
The main bullshit complaint I’ve seen about the Horizon games boils down to “Aloy doesn’t make my peepee hard”. There are dudes out there who only want to see women they can goon to.
People like Geralt, they like his brooding attitude. Making. Game about ciri means they don’t get a game with Geralt. And they really want another game with him for some reason.
Idk why they blame woke though
I’ve only played Witcher 3, and I thought it was obvious that it’s Ciri’s story being told from the perspective of the supporting cast, and that is an incredibly cool literary device.
Honestly the longform books take a similar approach, telling several very important people’s stories from the perspective of how their stories intertwined with Geralt’s and later Ciri’s
Yeah. I haven’t played 1 much beyond the first 10 minutes, was too janky. 2 was mostly focused on the war, with Geralt being the most important character IMO. In 3 he was no longer THE most important character, but he was a close second - out of a large cast of supporting characters that aided them on the way.
Tomb Raider. That’s all I’m gonna say.
Reading is also woke
Well I have had dreams of reading books. They’re weird. Like, I know it’s a dream and the sentences don’t make any sense. But I keep reading it anyways.
If a game is deemed “woke” by right-wing shitheads, that’s like a seal of approval for me. Now, the game might still suck, but it’s not because of being inclusive and diverse.
This is the first I’ve heard of this game being deemed woke.
Didn’t you hear? Ciri is older and therefore ugly now. The worst offence that a designer could make for a female character.
It’s a lot easier - if Americans don’t like what Europeans are doing, then it’s a great thing they’re doing!
If it does “flop”, they undoubtedly would chalk it up to it being inclusive and diverse though. Otherwise they just quickly move on to the next target.
Yup, with movies and games alike if it’s “woke” and flops they always say that’s why, when the truth is it just sucked.
People are complaining of having to stare at a female’s body while playing? They prefer looking at at male’s butt? That’s soooo gay!
I’m a straight male who is very secure in my masculinity. But I’ve gotten shit from people when I use female characters in games. Never understood why that’s a problem.
I usually play as a female character in games too. I prefer to look at pretty things.
Can we stop with this stupid and homophobic argument?
- This seems sarcastic. I can tell by the punctuations i am seeing.
- It’s abit gay tho
Lol yes, thank you. I’m of the opinion that using /s defeats the whole point of sarcasm… But at the same time I suspect the world is going crazy via misinterpreted sarcasm on the Internet… It’s a tough decision, maybe I should be using /s but then it’s not sarcasm anymore…
Poe’s law is an adage of Internet culture which says that, without a clear indicator of the author’s intent, any parodic or sarcastic expression of extreme views can be mistaken by some readers for a sincere expression of those views.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law
Poe’s law is based on a comment written by Nathan Poe in 2005 on christianforums.com, an Internet forum on Christianity. The message was posted during a debate on creationism, where a previous poster had remarked to another user: “Good thing you included the winky. Otherwise people might think you are serious”.[4]
The reply by Nathan Poe read:[1]
Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won’t mistake for the genuine article.
The original statement of Poe’s law referred specifically to creationism, but it has since been generalized to apply to any kind of fundamentalism or extremism.[3]
Since when is Poe making laws? I thought he’s an X-Wing pilot.
🤣
I don’t think sarcasm is the problem. The bad actors are. In fact i think sarcasm is more necessary than ever:
- If we don’t understand what is and IS NOT sarcasm, the opinions of bad actors won’t be laughed at. If they aren’t actively laughed at they’ll be encouraged by the idea that they’re being taken seriously.
- If people don’t learn to recognize bullshit with friends(in a safe environment) then they’re going to fail to differentiate the truth elsewhere where it can truly hurt them and those around them.
Have you considered that the comment could, in fact, be a joke?
His point is that making it a joke is kinda homophobic. Like being gay is a joke.
the joke isn’t about being gay at all. it’s about reactionary people complaining about things being woke and gay but refusing to play with a woman on camera at all times. it’s using their inconsistency against them; not advocating for it.
It’s making fun of idiots that think like that, not gay people.
Yes
Why the downvotes though!? This is GOLD!
Not gonna lie, I was hoping they’d use some Law of Surprise stuff to give Geralt a new ward and let you create your own Witcher. But, if instead I get to do teleport strike bullshit with Ciri’s powers, I’ll be content.
They should do a Last Of Us prequel with Joel, but he dies in that one too due to time travel shenanigans.
You’re not going to play Witcher 4 because of woke Ciri, I’m not going to play because I don’t like the games. We are not the same
For real, the battle mechanics are just so clunky and slow. And the magic is just 5 times the same spell but with different colors.
Not to mention that you are shoehorned into a character that you don’t get to decide, and the NPCs laugh at you if you choose dialogue options that don’t fit this characters mold.
Rather play an actual RPG than this action adventure akin to Tomb Raider.
You’re not going to play Witcher 4 because you don’t like the games, I’m not going to play because my PC is aging and I feel new GPUs are so ridiculously overpriced, I don’t want to replace my RTX 3060 ti anytime soon.
I feel that. Still rocking a 1080. And I’ve got a series s for new releases.
I had my 1080 until last month. Enjoying 5080 now!
I can’t play games anymore because of nonsense like this. I changed hobbies to writing Chinese poetry and watching ballet. The last Ballet I saw was Swan Lake in China. Absolutely beautiful.
Swansea is too woke. It has a female lead role.
hot take: i fucking hated the way ciri and every single other woman in witcher3 was written/portrayed…
they all felt like they were written by incels who have never met or conversed with an actual real woman. they were shallow game of thrones/fantasy tropes and felt like walking talking cliches. i literally cringed through every interaction…
These types of comments ignore the fact that Geralt is written in the exact same way.
The “romance” dialog options tend to be god awful.
And if I’m honest the books are similar. I like them, but all the women are super sexy super hot and they exist for Geralt to have sex with
I get this somewhat but including ciri? I feel like there was none of that with her character. What about her struck you as that?
she was basically wesley crusher, without the character growth… she was a plot device, not a character.
“Shut up, Ciri.” - Captain Picard
Unpopular opinion:
Witcher 4 won’t be as good as Witcher 3 cause the third one was very good.
So no matter who they chose, it’s probably gonna be underwhelming.
Nah, if the next Witcher MC was Dandelion, that would absolutely be the best one.
I thought the same thing about Cyberpunk, they couldn’t make lightning strike twice. But in the end, once the issues were fixed, it’s also one of my favorite modern games.
Although I really liked cyberpunk and I’ve finished both that and Witcher 3 and cyberpunk is my favourite…
Really? I thought Witcher 3 was iconic, like it broke out of the regular gaming culture and into the mainstream, idk if cyberpunk did that.
My world would be better if Witcher 4 is better than 3 but I have doubts
This is why we’ll never see elder scrolls 6
Eh, I didn’t like Skyrim as much as Morrowind, so I think there’s some room for ES6 to improve on ES5.
Oblivion and Skyrim were both massive disappointments to me.
If ES 6 comes out, it’ll have maybe three skills - magic/combat/sneak. Any interesting/complicated lore will be retconned and shoved aside. (Why wasn’t Cyrodil a jungle? Where are my river drakes? What happened to Sutch? Where is my Colovian armor set?)
Morrowind is the best. Oblivion remaster is better than skyrim (in my Morrowboomer opinion) and that was just refreshing a 20 year old game. I feel like there is a lot of hype for TES6 that it may not live up to, but surpassing skyrim is definitely doable.
Honestly TES6 has one thing going for it and that’s that Skyrim is over a decade old now so matching the scale and scope of Skyrim is much more achievable.
In my opinion when a sequel falls flat or is outshined by an earlier entry in the series, it’s usually because the studio messed with the formula for the gameplay, not because of a change in characters
Oh we will see it ! I’m confident it’s going to be shit, but who knows
also the formula is starting to feel old so it won’t have as much lustre as long as they don’t reinvent themselves
It can be better
If they fix the horrendous gameplay
People downvote you but I feel you.
The gameplay just doesn’t hold up, the combat is too basic, has no depth and become stale really quickly
Fix two things:
- The weird loot range issue, where if you’re not standing in juuuuust the right angle, you won’t be able to loot certain corpses or containers.
- The fact that, outside of combat, controlling Geralt feels like driving a boat. Weird large turn radiuses, slow start and stop, etc… The devs did this to make his movement look more natural, but it feels like the game is constantly fighting against or trying to correct your inputs.
Combine those two things together, and you get a consistently frustrating experience outside of combat. Installing a ranged loot mod was one of the biggest quality of life upgrades. You walk near a corpse or container, and it automatically gets looted.
The combat can also get repetitive at times, and the difficulty scaling is weird too. But as long as those two things and still deliver a good story, I think players will ultimately walk away happy.
If I ever replay it I’m going to try and remember the existence of this mod because it was painful
I’m sorry, but I still can’t help but laugh about the anti-woke Asterion flat-butt mod, and now in my head I just see all anti-woke gamers as jealous flat-butters.
They hate us cause they anus
Woah… Is that a… A Triple entendre?
Aint us (the original idiom)
They’re anuses/assholes/jerks (the pun)
No cheeks, just anus (literal)
The complexity was initially sensed, though I did not encompass it at the time of writing
E pluribus anus
Any person who unironically uses “woke” is a complete douche canoe and can go get fucked. Change my mind.
Wrong way round. The unironic woke is the BLM socially aware activist.
It’s since around 2020 woke is mostly used as an insult by douche canoes.
Woke is now a synonym for Social Justice warrior.
A person or movement prioritizing moralizing outrage about minor grievances over actual effective societal change.
As my half Nigerian cousin likes to say on issues like white people wearing dreadlocks: “That’s something only white privileged women care about.”
Yes I agree with your interpretation of what woke currently means. I’m saying that this is actually using woke ironically an insult. An unironic usage has no negative connotations.
The best new use of woke is the woke right.
The author James Lindsay has defined it in similar terms, as “a victimhood-based identity politics” whose “victim groups are whites, Christians, men, and straight people”. He argues that the movement is “roughly intersectional” insofar as it is obsessed with identity politics and a grievance relating to anti-white racism. “Like their counterparts on the Woke Left,” Lindsay writes, “the Woke Right have accepted as fact that there’s a conspiracy against people like them and that their only real hope is to lean into the identity grouping and advocate for collective power under that heading”. In these terms, the “woke right” is a kind of ideological doppelgänger, whose members exhibit the same precisionist and absolutist tendencies of their leftist counterparts.
Pierce Morgan uses it more and more often against right wingers to great effect.
Right. The right wingers are arguing (usually without knowing it because they don’t understand words) for people to stay asleep and not think or question
Don’t let the alt-right dictate what “woke” means
I think that ship has sailed. That word is at the moment a clear sign the person using it is an asshole. It can be reclaimed, but right now I don’t see that happening.
Let Doechii do it for you 😛
I would love to not let the nazis dictate how the swastika is used, but their perversion of the original meaning has permanently altered how it’s seen by the rest of the world. Claiming the moral high ground by trying to force something to mean what it no longer does is a pointless exercise.
It’s not about claiming the moral high ground, it’s just that you can’t have a word that can be used to mean its opposite, even if “sarcastically”. The word woke is just the past tense of wake, nothing else. It can be used to represent someone “waking up” from the hide-your-head-in-the-sand routine, or becomes able to see things from a new perspective. For the right, it doesn’t really mean anything, but they are pretty much using it as the new “sheeple”. Which doesn’t make any sense.
But the important thing is this: if someone is ridiculing people for wanting to be informed, involved in society, or generally just themselves, the only thing they’re actually insulting is their own intelligence and heart. If we let them have their use of woke as a generic mean insult, we lose sight of that.
More than swastikas, I think this case is closer to saying “you can use literally to mean figuratively because it’s common use” to which I also say no, fuck that.
But yes, swastikas forever symbolise Nazism. That doesn’t negate their original, positive meaning previously found in history, religion and culture. This is not an “achtually it’s ok to draw swastikas because they are actually good”. I’m just saying that context, and intent, matters. If you tattoo one on yourself as a westerner, you’re a Nazi - and it’s ok that everyone treats you like one. But should those original uses be stopped because it’s now “forever bad”?
I won’t. Nobody is able to define what “wokeness” really means to them because it’s mostly code for “subset of people I don’t want to exist around me”.
Surprisingly, that doesn’t sound very good when said out loud.
“Woke” has had a consistent meaning since its introduction into the English language almost a hundred years ago. It means “Aware of systemic racism.”
When blues legend Lead Belly ended a show in 1938 by saying, “Stay woke,” he meant: “Stay aware of systemic racism.”
When some chud on YouTube in 2025 says “‘Woke’ is ruining gaming,” he means that awareness of systemic racism is ruining gaming. For him.
And when an American politician calls himself “anti-woke”, he’s saying that he opposes the awareness of systemic racism. Not that he denies the existence of it, but that he’d prefer no one talk about it, so that it can continue.
When some chud on YouTube in 2025 says “‘Woke’ is ruining gaming,” he means that awareness of systemic racism is ruining gaming. For him.
I don’t think it even goes that far tbh. Especially for less political, more gamer-type “conservatives”, it just means “the other side”, forcing so many girls (1) into their game. Maybe it’s just to deflect having to admit to being a misogynist.
And when an American politician calls himself “anti-woke”, he’s saying that he opposes the awareness of systemic racism. Not that he denies the existence of it, but that he’d prefer no one talk about it, so that it can continue.
Yes, exactly. No sane person would call themselves “anti-woke”. Unless they’re successful in subverting its meaning to be “those we’ll put in concentration camps”. Oh wait, that still wouldn’t make you sane.
Woke means being aware that an interaction with a cop is a life or death situation. Cops aren’t your friends, they’re not here to protect you. They’re a threat, motivated by cruelty and love of power. When dealing with a cop, you have to speak gently, keep your hands visible at all times, and declare your intentions for every action. Or you could die. You could still die even if you do all that.
Oh boy the only issue I have is that I’m going to be unstoppable, Ciri is literally a broken main character nearing her full potential.
Bitch can fucking dimension travel, trained in sword and fight by other witchers and IIRC Yennefer trained her in some sort of sorcery arts as well so it’d be like having an OP mix of Geralt+Yennefer
Yennefer trained her in some sort of sorcery arts
So I recently devoured the book series and can clarify, she was first trained as a Witcher, then as a sourceress by Yennefer, but after she was teleported into the middle of the desert and tried to use fire as a source of power out of desperation, she gave up all magical abilities as the fire was trying to consumer her. So shes a brilliant swordswoman, has partial Witcher mutation (some of the mutations come from the secret Witcher diet which she was fed at Ker Moren while being trained) and depending on when in the timeline the game takes place she would have incredible reflexes and some interdimensional travel capabilities.
There’s also some really interesting opportunities for storytelling given how Ciri’s background is just soaked in trauma. On that note, I am also curious if they intend to play down the salaciousness for this entry or not. In the books Ciri was definitely curious (and heavily implied to be bi) but remained a virgin, and by the end of the series she was still a minor by modern standards. I want to say she was 16 or so at the end of the last book.
I’m super excited to see where this game goes, because if its worthy of being released after the masterpiece that was The Witcher 3, it’s going to be brilliant
With regards to Ciri’s age, she’s 21 during the main events in The Witcher 3.
At the end of the books she’s 17.
No idea if they’ll play down the salaciousness or not, but given when the game will likely take place that at least won’t be any issues with the main character being a minor.
Don’t forget the carnivorous unicorns
I mean, she couldn’t even counterattack in W3.
Bitch
Why?
Is there an interpretation where it means somebody who is shockingly audacious?
Everything should be woke actually. If you complain about wokeness I don’t think you deserve to enjoy things
Imo there are two types of “wokeness”.
There is a diverse inclusive story by someone with an underrepresented experience who partially lived that story and has a unique perspective and ideas.
And then there is a “diverse” story constructed by an all white male board of execitives who think “wokeness” is trendy.
Movies like I Saw The TV Glow, Parasite, Sinners, etc are fantastic “woke” stories coming from the former group.
The latter group comes up with stories like “Ghostbusters but all women” or “Oceans 11 but all women” which I think should rightly be criticized.
The problem with Ghostbusters (2016) didn’t have anything to do with having an all female cast, it was more about the timing of the jokes, the lack of slow quiet scenes to build atmosphere, and the effects being crappy unmemorable CGI
The problem with Ghostbusters (2016) didn’t have anything to do with having an all female cast
That’s what I just said.
If women arent the ones greenlighting these movie, directing them, or even writing the script, how could they possibly be the problem?
I listed a bunch of actually good “woke” media. They were made by a trans and black creators but if you want examples of women being funny look at Veep, the Good Place, 30 Rock, Parks and Rec, etc.
The problem as I pointed out is a predominately white male board member of business grads who feel having an all female cast is all they need to market a movie, so they can skip giving a shit about the product.
it was more about the timing of the jokes, the lack of slow quiet scenes to build atmosphere, and the effects being crappy unmemorable CGI
Because Sony can’t make a movie to save their lives. Look at Morbius, Kraven, Madame Web, etc.
There was a time in the early 00s/10s where society said “any representation is good representation”.
Movies like Black Panther and Get Out were inherently going to do well because they catered to an audience demand that had been long underrepresented.
Nowadays there are actually good movies in competition. We dont have to settle for bad representation. If you want a horror movie that’s an allegory for not transitioning you can watch it, if you want a vampire movie where the vampires are an allegory for racism and white exploitation that’s in theaters right now.
Spotting background character 1 and 2’s gay kiss in Disney’s reboot of Buzz Lightyear feels a lot less exciting to me.
When a bunch of white board members decide to make a movie “for women” and resurrect a dead IP and start forcing a script, that will be inherently more shallow than going to Amy Poehler and asking if she has an idea to pitch.
This is why Marvel succeeded in giving Ryan Coogler a higher degree of creative control for Black Panther than Sony did for any of the female cast in Ghostbusters.
While I’m enjoying diverse films like Sinners and I Saw the TV Glow, if you’re more interested in Disney’s live action remake of The Little Mermaid, or Disney’s live action remake of Snow White, go right ahead and watch it. I’m not saying you can’t.
But the idea you have to “support it” is nothing but marketing. I don’t think you’re really supporting diverse stories, I think you’re supporting corporations who exploit diversity and intentionally rage bait the worst racists imaginable for free marketing instead of investing the areas that you point out would make the movie better.
