There are 2 things that annoy me about the new living world. The first is the portrayal of Smodur and Crecia. The story tries so very hard to make Smodur look like an arrogant fool while Crecia is made to look like the wise mother, who can do no wrong. Trying her very best to save the Char. In doing so the Char are made to look like fools who have no idea what they are doing, a race that cannot be self deterministic and only Crecia the savior knows whats best for them. The Charr have fought the Norn, the humans, the ghosts of Ascalon and somehow a civil war will destroy them? Give me a break!
The second is the opinion of the commander in the story. Why is the commander given lines to disagree with Smodur? Aren't we the commander? Don't we get to choose if we agree or disagree with Smodur? The way in which Smodur was made the antagonist, the game has made me do something no other game before has; taking the side of the antagonist. When exploring themes of morality, there should be grey areas, it should not be as simple as black or white. The witcher does this beautifully. In the witcher. there are consequences to every action (Actions we perceive as good/bad), but when there are only consequences to decisions one side takes, it begins to feel like the writers are not telling a story but rather injecting their opinions of morality in the game. I just don't enjoy that.
Anyway whose side are you on? Team Smodur, team Crecia or team Bangar? If I could pick, I would choose Bangar. A Charr trying to control an Elder Dragon? sign me up!