Posted June 15, 2011
227: I'd agree with that if not for the fact that it occurs right after Letho tells you all about what happened to Yennefer. Besides that, Triss is nearby and Ciri was barely mentioned in the story.
It's not the strongest connection, but that was definitely the explanation that I enjoyed the most. More than likely the devs chose something intentionally vague with a number of different possible interpretations and added it in to get people talking :)
I do like your explanation, but there's something about the prominence of that scene that suggests a deeper meaning to people like me than just "something innocent in a world of sin." Maybe that's all it is, but the depth of field in the part where it's just Geralt's eyes watching the ladybug begin to take flight seemed really suggestive of something... else.
Mv.c9: Maybe that was the point all along, to give everyone their own interpretation, I did read what Adokat said, and I agree on it Partially. It's not the strongest connection, but that was definitely the explanation that I enjoyed the most. More than likely the devs chose something intentionally vague with a number of different possible interpretations and added it in to get people talking :)
I do like your explanation, but there's something about the prominence of that scene that suggests a deeper meaning to people like me than just "something innocent in a world of sin." Maybe that's all it is, but the depth of field in the part where it's just Geralt's eyes watching the ladybug begin to take flight seemed really suggestive of something... else.
It could be anything, but like you (227) I also look for something really related to the story, in the WHOLE witcher story killing was never even once mentioned to be a bad thing, geralt never felt shame for what he did, all the choices he made or you made for him, he was happy with it, happy about slaughtering the nilfgardians, killing the kedwenis, never said "oh why I killed, then I should stop killing" it was never something that was considered now we need to stop.
Witcher is there to kill monsters, but as he mentioned in "The Witcher 1" -- while talking to abigail for the first time and when she said about the swords (steel for human and silver for monster) -- geralt responds they are both for slaying monsters, one the real monsters and one for killing monsters humans have become.
Maybe i also misinterpreted Adokat's saying again, but I hope i didnt. but what i meant is that "something innocent in a wold of sin" is a bit unlikely but not impossible.
EDIT: ADOKAT I just saw your post (it was posted before i made this post so i didnt see) and I agree with you -- almost entirely.
At least in my game, I saw Geralt as being disgusted with all the infighting, backstabbing, and intrigue among the nobility. In the process of chasing the Kingslayer, he basically became one in the process. He's sick of having the choose the lesser evil. That's why, for me anyways, it was so satisfying to have a drink with Letho and then just walk away.
BTW- you line about Geralt's conversation with Abigail made me remember the coolest line at the *spoilers-duh* end of the first game, where Geralt goes to give the coup de grace to de Aldersburg, who knocks away Geralt's steel sword. Geralt draws his silver sword, and Aldersburg exclaims 'That sword...is for monsters.' Without a word, Geralt plunges the sword into his chest. Badass.
Post edited June 15, 2011 by Adokat