Um. Yes. And also the only people watching discovery are trek fans. It's not a show for the general public.
You are wrong about everything.
The Witcher - Netflix
- Thread starter John Clark
- Start date
You are wrong about everything.
I'm a little surprised they aren't taking more from the games since that the only reason anybody even gives a shit about The Witcher outside of Poland is because of the games, especially third one, which was a huge hit, and has even made appearance on some best video game ever lists. The show probably wouldn't even exist if it weren't for the games.
Hell, the US releases of the books even use artwork from The Witcher III on their covers.
Hell, the US releases of the books even use artwork from The Witcher III on their covers.
Well, it might be a rights issue?! Presumably, this way, they only have to deal with the writer and their own production team, if they used elements that originated in the games, they might have to pay the developers and their designers.
Witcher trailer is here. https://www.imdb.com/list/ls053181649/videoplayer/vi2381168409
I'm surprised they say "based on the hit novels." They're fairly obscure, actually, and you're right that the popularity of the franchise is mostly due to the games. If anything, those games prompted many to find out about the books, not vice versa. So, in a roundabout way, the games are directly responsible for the franchise getting popular enough for series to be made.
That new trailer gives me more confidence. And the shot of him in the bathtub has to be a nod to the games.
His fighting style is totally from the games. It's pretty amazing actually!
Without the game Witcher 3 I would never have started with the novels
I started with Witcher 1 because I heard there was sex in it. I was 22 and it was enough to sell it to me. I remember being so disappointed that WItcher 2 was a little less sexist.
I started with Witcher 1 because people recommended it and I saw it in one of our bargain bookshops.
I didn't get into it at the time but tried the first book and thought it was ok. It's really Witcher 3 that got me back into the series (and ended up with me getting the second game and more of the books)
I didn't get into it at the time but tried the first book and thought it was ok. It's really Witcher 3 that got me back into the series (and ended up with me getting the second game and more of the books)
My only experience with the franchise so far is the 3rd game, but that's been enough to get interested in checking out the show, and the books eventually.
I think the showrunner did say somewhere that the bathtub scene was one of the only things they took from the games.
I'll be watching (probably) a couple of episodes shortly. I reckon the rest will be Sunday though.
Is it the moniker lifted from the Elric books? Or something different?
Am I correct in understanding the the games were designed to take place *after* the novels, so that the two are not mutually exclusive stories...at least until the author writes new ones?
I have played the first two games, but despite *really* wanting to like them, I sucked at the combat in both and didn't get very far (literally couldn't even get past the first level of Witcher 2.)
So I have a vague gist of the world, some of the major characters that I gather were also in the books, but nothing particularly in-depth.
I have played the first two games, but despite *really* wanting to like them, I sucked at the combat in both and didn't get very far (literally couldn't even get past the first level of Witcher 2.)
So I have a vague gist of the world, some of the major characters that I gather were also in the books, but nothing particularly in-depth.
