DID THAT END HOW I THINK IT DID?

OH GOD NO. THIS IS SO WRONG. I REFUSE TO BELIEVE IT.

END OF STORY!? HOW COULD YOU SAY THAT GERALT? THAT WAS SO COLD.... ;_;

/randomrantend

At least I can go on with my gaming life now that I finished the game.

Oh wait, mods... Welp.

which ending are we talking about? racist, neutral, or terrorist? Or does he say the same in all of them?

Like avatara, I need more information for join your public masturbation or your angry mob

The identity of the Grandmaster. It's a twist ending. It's the same for all alignments.

I wonder if the uh... Grandmaster actually knew he had traveled in time though. Something about that ending left me thinking he probably didn't quite notice that.

The grand master deserves his end, no matter who was before joining to the order.

And yes, is a harsh end for the game.

After I recover from the initial shock I embrace the harsh ending.
In my opinion a happy ending would be a cheap ending for this game.

The grandmaster's monologue was what gave it away for me, when he directly said "You always said that..." and I recalled having said such thing to Alvin. Of course, finding the amulet after he had died pretty much sealed the deal, though I really didn't want to believe it :(

At least I didn't surrender him to the wild hunt and finished the deed myself.

I really liked that line too.

I didn't like that the story resorted to token megalomania. Quite frankly, I thought it was kind of lazy.

The final battle itself was pretty easy, after I was beefed up by Abigail and Triss. I'm also surprised that the Lady of the Lake didn't come help me.

I was so successful during the final battle that I decided to fight the King of the Wild Hunt, and won.

Too bad the ending cinematic recounted so few of the choices I made.

Woah, I never picked up on the fact that the grandmaster was Alvin. Heck, I just played through The Witcher 2 hoping to find out what happened to him, heh.

I read through various other sources that describe the story (wikipedia, and witcher.wikia.com), and none of them mentioned it. I think perhaps it was a little too subtle.. would have been a cool revelation if I had found out about it at the time.

I think no sources should mention it.
At least not without gigant spoiler alerts.

Those sources do have spoiler tags, and mention everything else. Honestly, my guess is that the people who wrote it didn't even pick up on it.

I finished the game several months ago, and I am still as angry about it as OP, lol.

1. "Too subtle." I agree, because there was no artistic reason for it to be subtle. It was subtle simply so that some people would miss the point.

2. "That sword is for monsters!" What happened to choices? What if I wanted to play a compassionate character, rather than one who categorically ignores the humanity of criminals? I should have had the option to kill him with the human sword.

3. Incidentally, why did Geralt have amnesia? What were the consequences of all the other choices you made along the way? Etc, etc.

His amnesia is a running theme through Witcher 1 / 2 / 3. Play 2, you'll find out more about it. The Alvin thing wasn't that subtle, but it wasn't commented upon, like you'd expect from such a revelation. OTOH, he was linked to the hunt in a way that I didn't quite understand and there were some things unexplained, but I played it with the bad translation, maybe something was lost there. There's more to come, don't expect to have all the answers, not even at the end of TW2. The games are linked, that's why they couldn't let it finish just any way you wanted. The story continues.

I like your answer! Thank you.

Also, I sure put my foot in it by asking about the amnesia. I am glad that no one spoiled it for me! I look forward to playing The Witcher 2.