The post criticizes not the expectation of players that haven't read the books, but of the subset of people that think making Ciri the protagonist is a political message, when it's just staying true to its source.

Your critique has nothing to do with this post.

Expectations differ from person to person. You see the games as a separate thing. They are obviously not. But it's totally fair to want another witcher game with Gerald with his story continued. If the original creator of the story didn't write it that way, then CD Project Red would have to come up with their own story. Straying too far from source material can end badly - see Game of Thrones seasons 6-8.

[+] vane@lemmy.world -7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Nah the author of article asume that all people that say that Ciri can't be a witcher it's because they claim it's woke and tries to turn those who disagree to say it's political. I clearly state it's not. I don't want Ciri in Witcher because I want to play Geralt. That's all. The author puts books to afirmate his claims that only people who read books are worthy to say something about Ciri being a Witcher protagonist and that everyone else says it's woke. No I disagree. Books are not Games.

[–] ZeroHora@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 days ago

Did you play TW3? Ciri is co-protagonist of the game, she is the character that has a journey.

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 2 points 2 days ago

It's a game series (and later media series) literally based on a series of books. The short stories tell Garalt's story, but the longform books are far more about Ciri than they are Geralt. Go read them they're brilliant books but more important to the point you'll understand why Ciri is so important to the story that's being told