I started a new game with the 1.10 patch as I heard there had been a change in the tutorial. Seems this change was severely muting Yennifer's "saucy" response when Geralt senses her toiletries.

Not what I expect from CD Projekt RED!

Hm... that would be weird. Can anyone else confirm this? What would be the point?

L.E. The patch log says:

● Fixes issue whereby Mutagen tutorial did not check if player possessed mutagens.
● Fixes issue whereby parries were not correctly taken into account during Combat
Tutorial.
● Fixes issue whereby Stash tutorial was unintentionally displayed when starting new
game.
● Fixes unwanted variation in display of certain tutorial text content.

Bump!

That's not censorship.

Well, I knew I would get confirmation or be shot down, so my plan worked! :)

It seems strange that just that voice file got corrupted though! The rest of the tutorial and the game (so far) seems fine! :)

Curious what you observed. Eg before and after. I don't even remember what she said originally that was saucy :)

"Geralt, stop fingering my toiletries." Not saucy at all. Just a polite request, as it was originally.

Yeah, I'm not remembering what the sauciness is supposed to be. Or what the possible interest in "censorship" could be, particularly in light of all the other things included in the game.

oic thanks. "fingering."

It takes a *very* immature mind to see that as saucy.

Surely it's the opposite to being immature to be able to read between lines?! You think it's a coincidence that she says "fingering" rather than "touching"? In that case there are immature gamers if they don't think it's "suggestive".

Fingering is only associated with sexual activities in the correct context. That context is absent -- she asks in a quiet, non-suggestive manner -- so there is no reading between the lines, if you understand the English language and it's nuances. I repeat, there is absolutely nothing suggestive in the request, or the way it's delivered, and as I said, only an immature mind, or somebody obsessed with such things would deem her line as 'saucy'.

Hereby recognizing it would be immature to argue this except in good humor, but I wholly agree that the intent was to emphasize the sexual tension in this scene. If we consider the writing team to be artists, which I do, we should assume they considered the verbiage with care and where thus aware of the potential for this line to have a sexual undertone.

Supposition. Any innuendo in the language and delivery is just not there. It simply isn't.