That's a strange claim, Sagi. Why do games -have- to allow choice? Especially with a fixed protagonist?
Yea it's hard to compare. Both are excellent, but in their own way. Books give you so much more perspective, they build the lore, you use your imagination to fill certain gaps, you create idealised Characters in your head based off the descriptions given etc. Whereas the games take that lore, and have created these really interesting stories within that world.
I think if I was forced to pick one, just based on overall enjoyment, I would have to say the games. The ability to make choices and the fact that CDPR have kept the story/characters so consistent and super interesting even with all those different divergent paths/choices, is really incredible. It makes you feel like you're actually influencing the story in some way and it's something that's just so cool and isn't possible in a book or movie. Gameplay, Visuals and Music are all very ingrained in the process of storytelling too, they all have an effect on your overall enjoyment of the plot and because those elements are also done very well (Maybe not so much Gameplay but it's still good), it brings together a really good package.
And we don't even know how 3 will turn out yet...
I like the plot of the book series far better.
And I'm talking about the overarching plot of the main saga here, not about the very well written side stories.
But I have to say that story of the games is very high quality too and doesn't have to hide from Sapkowski's work.
It continues his legacy and does it justice.
And I'm talking about the overarching plot of the main saga here, not about the very well written side stories.
But I have to say that story of the games is very high quality too and doesn't have to hide from Sapkowski's work.
It continues his legacy and does it justice.
It depends on how The Witcher 3 turns out to be... If they conclude Geralt's legend in a memorable way then maybe I will consider it at same level as the books which are a masterpiece.
But so far, the books are superior. In fact, they are the reason why this saga exists. Without the novels the games would have never been created.
But so far, the books are superior. In fact, they are the reason why this saga exists. Without the novels the games would have never been created.
I just really like the fact that they decided to make the games into a continuation of the story in the books, rather than retelling them or just using the same world. Because while the ending of the saga was a satisfying one, it really was open enough to the point where you could assume that Ciri's story was not done, and by extension (entwined destinies) Geralt and Yennefer's, whom were also revealed to not actually be dead after the pogrom in Rivia.
I'm also glad that CDPR felt comfortable making extreme changes. I was really surprised, pleasantly so, by the liberties they took with characters' fates. Killing kings, rebuilding Witcher schools, apparently setting the ground for Nilfgaard's conquest. These are brave things. They weren't afraid to shake the state of the world as it was left in the end of the books. I hope Witcher 3 will also take the liberty of painting its own history picture.
Don't listen to book fanatics mate the
games are definitely better just because of them The Witcher Series is so popular in the end apart from a few hardcore
fans no one gives a shit about the books
Geralt is much more badass in the games and not this emotional Romeo and Father he is in the books (his obsession with Yennefer and Ciri I don't like it at all)
games are definitely better just because of them The Witcher Series is so popular in the end apart from a few hardcore
fans no one gives a shit about the books
Geralt is much more badass in the games and not this emotional Romeo and Father he is in the books (his obsession with Yennefer and Ciri I don't like it at all)
yeah and without the games the Series in general would still only be enjoyed by Poles only
So whats your point
its isn't trolling its an opinion
for me the books are nothing more than an extra preparing me for TW 3 (currently reading them they are ok)
TW 1 TW 2 & soon TW3 instead are the the whole franchise for me
And believe me I'm probably the majority TW 3 will probably sell very good (I really hope so) but only 10% of the fans
will buy the books and read them trust me they really are just an extra
Well that's one way to see it.
In fact, the games are simply fan art for the books. It is how they started.
Now, the games have sold much better than the books have, especially after TW3 comes out.
However this doesn't change the fact that CDPR has created fan art, based on the original. One can not say that the games just add to the books, because they are not. They are something extra. A different franchise if you will.
You can say though, that reading the books will add to your experience playing the game. Since the games are based on the story and the world of the Books.
You can't say that the books are extra material, complementary to the games. It is untrue. It's the other way around. Regardless of sales.
Well you can say it, but you will have a hard time supporting your claim. I think.
In fact, the games are simply fan art for the books. It is how they started.
Now, the games have sold much better than the books have, especially after TW3 comes out.
However this doesn't change the fact that CDPR has created fan art, based on the original. One can not say that the games just add to the books, because they are not. They are something extra. A different franchise if you will.
You can say though, that reading the books will add to your experience playing the game. Since the games are based on the story and the world of the Books.
You can't say that the books are extra material, complementary to the games. It is untrue. It's the other way around. Regardless of sales.
Well you can say it, but you will have a hard time supporting your claim. I think.
Last edited:
"fan art" sounds a bit silly doens't it I mean they got the IP and turned it into a worlwide succes
and you are saying its fan art sry but thats just the book fanatic talking like some other guy even said that its just Fanfiction
I'm sure thats the case for you guys who read the books first and loved them BUT for the majority of the people its the opposite
way they love the games and they wanted to expand their experience by buying extra stuff like the book saga thats it
the books are just extra for most people and thats a fact
And in my opinion they are better than the books TW 1 and TW 2 (especially this one is just awesome) they are written better
they use the given lore very good and I also liked how they used the whole Amnesia thing
There's too much focus on Ciri in the book saga (sometimes I prefer the short stories) I'm currently almost at the end of Book 3
and I just coulnd't care less about her whole "falka" story
That's exactly what I'm trying to say.
I'm not taking away CDPR's success. Nor do I doubt their great writing, and brilliant use of the world. Even if I did nobody would care I believe. However the games were created by fans of the books, that were inspired from them. Thus making the claim that the games are in fact fan art quite valid. Very successful fan art if you prefer.
It's exactly as you said it. The majority of people read the books as something extra, to further add to their experience of playing the games. They are entitled to do so. It is a fact. You are also entitled to have an opinion on whether the books or the games are written better. You can say which one you prefer.
What you can not say, and sorry for repeating myself, is that the books, are simply something "extra". It's simply semantics, and I don't think they matter so much in the end. What I'm trying to say is that, in fact, the games are something extra to the books. Not the other way around. Regardless of what people feel.
I'm not taking away CDPR's success. Nor do I doubt their great writing, and brilliant use of the world. Even if I did nobody would care I believe. However the games were created by fans of the books, that were inspired from them. Thus making the claim that the games are in fact fan art quite valid. Very successful fan art if you prefer.
It's exactly as you said it. The majority of people read the books as something extra, to further add to their experience of playing the games. They are entitled to do so. It is a fact. You are also entitled to have an opinion on whether the books or the games are written better. You can say which one you prefer.
What you can not say, and sorry for repeating myself, is that the books, are simply something "extra". It's simply semantics, and I don't think they matter so much in the end. What I'm trying to say is that, in fact, the games are something extra to the books. Not the other way around. Regardless of what people feel.
Last edited:
Right now, the two plots are on about the same level for me (the fact that it's essentially the same plot probably has something to do with that). TW1 and the short stories were both a very strong start - little to do with the overarching Wild Hunt plot. Then there are The Blood of Elves and Baptism of Fire, the Wild Hunt plot has only a faint presence there, but it certainly alters the general feel of the story and world. Still strong though. Similarly with TW2. Then we get to the meat of the Wild Hunt plot in the books, and TW3. Now, I know I absolutely hate that bit in the books, but have yet to see how it's handled by CDPR. The less we see of that, the more I'll like the games' plot over that of the books.
*looks at TW3's subtitle*
I'm not holding my breath though.
*looks at TW3's subtitle*
I'm not holding my breath though.
Last edited:
Games don't have to allow choice, but it's a thing that defines them as a medium - especially RPGs - Interacvtivity. And in Witcher it's one of the biggest reason it's so great.
Example - (simplyfing) in a Witcher games, Geralt has a choice to save someone, or leave him getting killed.
In books you only have one path to go - the one imagined by the author.
More wide choices, make a good character design very hard, because you are playing a different Geralt every time - its gets convoluted and the character often is not as fleshed out as the same character from the book or movie.
Geralt in the books is more fleshed out than in the games - but that's a compromise you have to pay when designing a game - and it works very well in Witcher, because the choices you make, all fit Geralt's character (fixed protagonist). And the characters are still very well designed and complex.
It does't work that well in games with a custom character - Skyrim, Mass Effect for example. The main characters are just very simple and bland (in my opinion). Your choices are so wide ranged - even the sex, race, evil or good - that characters become simpler and simpler (even the side characters).
It's next to impossible to make a game like Skyrim with that quality characters as the Witcher.
I enjoyed the overarching story, characters, encounters and conclusions of both the Novel series and the Game series about the same. Some high points in each series (ie: W1's ending or the Book's altercations with Nilfgaard) and some great characters in each as well (ie: W2's Vernon Roche and the book's Leo Bonhart)
In the end both the book series and the game series are fantastic. The books gave us a fantastic baseline by creating the complex world and great characters, while the games did a fantastic job of bringing the whole Witcher universe to life while continuing the story in a very enjoyable and faithful fashion.
In the end both the book series and the game series are fantastic. The books gave us a fantastic baseline by creating the complex world and great characters, while the games did a fantastic job of bringing the whole Witcher universe to life while continuing the story in a very enjoyable and faithful fashion.
I like both books and games. I too believe that the games helped more people discover the books. The 1st did exactly that for me. I read quite a lot of fantasy but until then I haven't even heard about the Witcher books and that is also true for the friends of mine who read a lot. And in case it happens to be just us, having read comments on various websites, supports that there are more people ( both inside and outside Europe ) who learnt of the books from the games, than people who had already read them.
But I could never consider them just an extra to the games. They started all of this. CDPR continued the adventures with equally good and beautiful storytelling. There are things that were better done in the books just as there are things that I like more in the games, but in the end both are important. Without the books there would be no games and without the games the books would not be as widespread as they are now. Plus, CDPR did a very good job on expanding upon the world of the WItcher. These guys like their fantasy and sci fi and have proved it while at the same time staying true to the source material.
But I could never consider them just an extra to the games. They started all of this. CDPR continued the adventures with equally good and beautiful storytelling. There are things that were better done in the books just as there are things that I like more in the games, but in the end both are important. Without the books there would be no games and without the games the books would not be as widespread as they are now. Plus, CDPR did a very good job on expanding upon the world of the WItcher. These guys like their fantasy and sci fi and have proved it while at the same time staying true to the source material.
I guess it's hard to judge the quality of writing here as there's the issue of translation. But if we take the original version of the books, Sapkowski is the true master of the Polish language, especially in its archaic forms and here - in the writing quality/style/finesse department - CDPR writers simply cannot touch him.
As far as the plot itself goes, in my - subjective - opinion TW2 came very close to Sapkowski's level.
As far as the plot itself goes, in my - subjective - opinion TW2 came very close to Sapkowski's level.
I find it very difficult to rate a book against visual media, as the method of storytelling is a lot different. But if I were to rate TW1 and TW2 against any movie version of the books that I could envisage, I think it would be comparable.