The Last Wish - How was it handled?

+
Quest was good, but putting a rejecting scene there and trying to act like it was all the wishes fault? Yeah...no. It's insulting to the source material and plain lazy.

So what did you want Yen to be forced even more on the players?
 
While any of the above interpretations may be correct since it's so vague, it is my understanding that CD Projekt Red actually asked Mr. Sapkowski if Geralt is truly dead when they were pitching their very first Witcher game, and it turned out that he wasn't.

This is also what I read a long time ago, though I don't have a source on it. There's good philosophical ground on a story being 'out of the hands' of the author, where a story can mean things they did not intend, but it's pretty clear here from both the author's perspective and CDPR's work that he's alive.
 
While any of the above interpretations may be correct since it's so vague, it is my understanding that CD Projekt Red actually asked Mr. Sapkowski if Geralt is truly dead when they were pitching their very first Witcher game, and it turned out that he wasn't.

Come on, he would never tell them. Actually if he did, he would have to consider the games canon, which he doesn't ( Sapkowski said it multiple times - that while he enjoys those games very much, it's not a continuation of his stories but a pure fanfiction on gamemakers' part)
 
Come on, he would never tell them. Actually if he did, he would have to consider the games canon, which he doesn't ( Sapkowski said it multiple times - that while he enjoys those games very much, it's not a continuation of his stories but a pure fanfiction on gamemakers' part)

It's an adaptation of his story and his characters, not a fan fiction.
He's i assume done very well by it with royalties and increased worldwide exposure for his books too.
 
I've always found the right interpretation to be the best one. You don't get any closure with your interpretation that a unicorn comes and heals Geralt. The correct interpretation is the one that brings all the themes of the books to a poignant close. Geralt learns that neutrality is untenable and that he is no longer the witcher he thought he was. Yennefer swallows her pride and makes an ultimate sacrifice. And Ciri learns in the end that eschewing responsibility has a cost. In any case, there is no even implication that Geralt and Yennefer are alive until the seen when the wake and it certainly doesn't occur to Triss or any other onlookers that this is the case.
 
Sapkowski said it multiple times - that while he enjoys those games very much, it's not a continuation of his stories but a pure fanfiction on gamemakers' part
I think he actually don't like games at all, just not his thing. Also he stated many time - the witcher story is ended, there can't be continuations. So if you're purist - everything in the games pure fanfiction, but since the author himself don't want to write continuation I accept games stories as maybe not lawful, but spiritual continuation.
 
Authors sometimes share details of the world they created, for example how George R. R. Martin shared important plot points from future books with the creators of the Game of Thrones show. Maybe it was the same for The Witcher. Or maybe it wasn't, and Mr. Sapkowski was like "Sure, he's alive, if you say so, go for it, it's still fan fiction".
 
Last edited:
So what did you want Yen to be forced even more on the players?
CDP could have did it without making the wish look like the cause of it all and had developed this further?

Because trying to antagonize the wish IS insulting to the books and competently shits on everything they went through.
 
It's not an adaptation in a sense that it's a CONTINUATION - because events take place after and not during the books. So it's the relation - in the games books are canon (because everything that happened there is valid for the games) but games are not valid when it comes to the Witcher Saga. Sapkowski can't tie himself to whatever gamemakers come up with.
 
So what did you want Yen to be forced even more on the players?

We just wanted a different reason for the break up.Why can't Geralt just tell her,that he's in love with Triss?I think this explanation vould've satisfied everyone.
 
It's not an adaptation in a sense that it's a CONTINUATION - because events take place after and not during the books. So it's the relation - in the games books are canon (because everything that happened there is valid for the games) but games are not valid when it comes to the Witcher Saga. Sapkowski can't tie himself to whatever gamemakers come up with.
If CDP didn't change certain things then yes it would be a continuation, but they HAVE changed things.
 
Best to just view the games as an Alternate Universe, with the books as a general backstory. DC Comics does things like this all the time. Multiple worlds/dimensions are already established, so it isn't much of a stretch to say that the games take place in a parallel world very similar but different in some aspects to the book's world.
 
Last edited:
CDP could have did it without making the wish look like the cause of it all and had developed this further?

Because trying to antagonize the wish IS insulting to the books and competently shits on everything they went through.

Ok this I can understand

Maybe they were just pissed that the writer of the books doesn't think of their games anything more than fanfiction
lol
 
It's not an adaptation in a sense that it's a CONTINUATION - because events take place after and not during the books. So it's the relation - in the games books are canon (because everything that happened there is valid for the games) but games are not valid when it comes to the Witcher Saga. Sapkowski can't tie himself to whatever gamemakers come up with.

Ok they are an adaptive continuation. Sapkowski can write his own version but the games are their own canon universe as they got permission to use his characters and universe. Using the word fan-fiction demeans their legitimacy.
 
You have a point, and while I conceed it's a nice idea, I've learned over time that when it comes to literary analysis, the literal approach is always the right one unless the alternate explanation is better supported.
Another thought: at the end of Book 2, when Ciri and Ihuarraquax (still a folly) were in the desert and Ciri saved them with her magic, while the Unicorn couldn't help itself, and in the end it was the other way around. The Unicorns magic helped Ciri where she was helpless, just like she says to Yen that there is nothing more pathetic than a sorceress in tears - which was the same thing Yennefer said to Ciri somewhere in the beginning.
So Geralt being alive seems the most logic one.
 
Ok this I can understand

Maybe they were just pissed that the writer of the books doesn't think of their games anything more than fanfiction
lol

Why wouid they be pissed about it?They said themselves,that the games are non-canon.
 
We just wanted a different reason for the break up.Why can't Geralt just tell her,that he's in love with Triss?I think this explanation vould've satisfied everyone.

On that I agree with you, making the wish the reason they were in love was silly

But since they didn't develop the love triangle at all I'm at least happy that they gave us an option to reject Yen

---------- Updated at 06:19 PM ----------

Why wouid they be pissed about it?They said themselves,that the games are non-canon.

That wasn't serious
Since the games are fanfiction (for the writer) they probably just went with the easy option here
 
Why wouid they be pissed about it?They said themselves,that the games are non-canon.

I speak for none other than myself, but when I did read the interview with Sapowski, I did find his comments to be rude or demeaning towards games. There may have been something lost in translation to me.
 
Top Bottom