Return to “Games”

Post

Re: The Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt

#411
I liked The Witcher series.. but can't help to think they could have done so much better.

Before watching it, I never played the games or read the books. I watched 4 episodes and at one point paused it and asked the room (all who knew nothing about the Witcher universe) if they knew what the heck way going on? Thankfully others were as lost as I was.

Since then I have played Witcher 3 plus the DLC twice over. I also looked up some of the background stuff and AFTER that the series was much better during the next re-watch.

It should honestly be used as an example on how not to introduce a mass universe to a crowd.

It's story structure was also strange... the first episode for example, it makes Geralt look a tad crazy and somewhat evil if you don't understand the full explanation. Renfri was planning on taking over the town market and was going to kill the towns people one by one until Stregobor faced her. This was sort of explained, kind of, AFTER Geralt killed all her men, but without that explanation it looks as if he went to town just to pick a fight so he could kill people... just because?

Lesser issues with the show are:
-The move away from most things being "shades of grey" and more towards "good fights evil". Shame.
-The time jumping could have been explained better...
-The actress who does Triss sucks and doesn't pull her character off at all well.

I know some people have an issue with some of the characters ethnic backgrounds being changed, I can honestly live with it, but get why some people have an issue. Though to be fair, it actually makes sense in the Witcher universe because humans originally didn't come from this world and were transported to this world from all over, what is assumed, Earth. So a massive mix of backgrounds in an early "period" piece actually works. The problem is it's not how it is in the books or the games.. so, ya, I understand, but can live with it.
My Signature
Post

Re: The Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt

#412
All fair points. [Spoilers follow!]

I'd played all three Witcher games (but not read any of the stories), and even I was bewildered for a while by the complete lack of signaling of any kind for the three (I think?) different points in time that the series jumps between. If the point of the first season had been that there was something like an explosion in time, OK -- but nope. The cutting back and forth with no color timing differences to help viewers understand "when" events were happening seems to have been done as a kind of artistic device, and that just made it flashy but not helpful in any narrative way.

"The actress who does Triss sucks and doesn't pull her character off at all well." ...and in the TV series. I wish this weren't so; I prefer to praise than criticize. But neither the voice acting for Triss in the games nor the acting for Triss in the TV show impressed me. Maybe it's just a dull character?

As for the first episode, the moment someone said the town Geralt was in was called Blaviken, I involuntarily blurted out, "oh, crap," because I knew what had to be coming, having heard Geralt being called "the Butcher of Blaviken" So Many Times in the games. Even so, I absolutely agree that anyone who hadn't read the books or played the games would have been confused by starting off a show that way, seemingly entirely unconnected to the narrative thread of the first season.

I prefer the characterization of Dandelion in the games to the kid in the TV show.

Overall, I kind of enjoyed Witcher Season 1. But that's mostly because I knew some of the background. Here's hoping Season 2 is less janky.
Post

Re: The Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt

#413
Flatfingers wrote:
Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:18 pm
"The actress who does Triss sucks and doesn't pull her character off at all well." ...and in the TV series. I wish this weren't so; I prefer to praise than criticize. But neither the voice acting for Triss in the games nor the acting for Triss in the TV show impressed me. Maybe it's just a dull character?
I disliked video game Triss at first as well. I played Witcher 3, then went back and played Witcher 2. Witcher 3 they really push a romance with Yennefer. First time I played the 3rd it felt weird to break up with your current girlfriend during a crisis to hook up with an ex. After seeing your relationship with Triss in the second game, it really warmed me up to her, even though her voice acting doesn't fit the rest of the world. (neither does Lamberts) The way Yennefer talks down to Geralt, and gets close to being abusive. (don't put up with her crap when you return to Kaer Morhen for example and see what happens) Triss wants to be your partner while Yennefer want to be your boss. So ya, besides the out of place voice, Triss is my "head cannon" of who Garalt ended up with.

Really sucks they picked someone to play her in the series who probably couldn't hack it in a soap opera.
Flatfingers wrote:
Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:18 pm
As for the first episode, the moment someone said the town Geralt was in was called Blaviken, I involuntarily blurted out, "oh, crap," because I knew what had to be coming, having heard Geralt being called "the Butcher of Blaviken" So Many Times in the games. Even so, I absolutely agree that anyone who hadn't read the books or played the games would have been confused by starting off a show that way, seemingly entirely unconnected to the narrative thread of the first season.
It's strange, because I am not sure who their target audience is. If they are only aiming for established fans, then they did poorly by changing too much. If they want to reach a new audience they did a crap job because setups had zero explanation. Luckily the rest of the show is pretty solid so it helps cover the bad areas.

I hope they have taken the criticism constructively and will adjust for season 2. Helps that it was a generally well liked series with a few common criticism. (when something is just flat our disliked creators tend to get their backs up and refused to change anything). They have already said they won't be doing the time jumping next season.
Flatfingers wrote:
Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:18 pm
I prefer the characterization of Dandelion in the games to the kid in the TV show.
I found Jaskier/Dandelion in the TV show alright. Maybe they picked a younger actor because they plan on aging him up as the series progresses?
My Signature
Post

Re: The Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt

#417
Talvieno wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 5:27 pm
Zanteogo wrote:
Fri Oct 02, 2020 8:09 am

The actress who plays Ciri is an adult made to look like a early teenage girl, so I guess they have this covered.
Wow, I had no idea. That's actually pretty impressive.
It is, though once I knew it's hard not to notice. Considering it's all done with costume and makeup it's not bad.

If the show continues on into her adult years the actress looks very close to the game version of her:

Image
My Signature
Post

Re: The Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt

#418
Zanteogo wrote:
Thu Oct 01, 2020 3:43 pm
I disliked video game Triss at first as well. I played Witcher 3, then went back and played Witcher 2. Witcher 3 they really push a romance with Yennefer. First time I played the 3rd it felt weird to break up with your current girlfriend during a crisis to hook up with an ex.
Because Yen isnt the ex, Yen is the has-been-going-for-decades relationship, with Triss occasionally butting in to get laid by Geralt.
In the books there's not the slightest doubt who'd geralt throw into a ghoul nest to save the other.

Zanteogo wrote:Triss is my "head cannon" of who Garalt ended up with.
Pew
Spoiler:      SHOW
Image
Zanteogo wrote: Really sucks they picked someone to play her in the series who probably couldn't hack it in a soap opera.
They could at least have dyed her hair the proper color... in the books its made very clear that triss has glorious auburn curls.
Zanteogo wrote: It's strange, because I am not sure who their target audience is. If they are only aiming for established fans, then they did poorly by changing too much. If they want to reach a new audience they did a crap job because setups had zero explanation. Luckily the rest of the show is pretty solid so it helps cover the bad areas.
They changed not much, except condensing.
From the books.
an important detail they left out is that Geralt suspected that Renfry wants to hold Blaviken hostage and kill marketgoers before he went there and killed them all.
(it also happened on the market square between stalls, and not some side alley)

They removed a hilarious exchange between Geralt and Istredd though.
"Yen loves me more! She spent all morning with me!" "All morning? Guess with whom she spent all night!"
Zanteogo wrote:
Flatfingers wrote:
Thu Oct 01, 2020 2:18 pm
I prefer the characterization of Dandelion in the games to the kid in the TV show.
I found Jaskier/Dandelion in the TV show alright. Maybe they picked a younger actor because they plan on aging him up as the series progresses?
That is because Dandelion is decades younger there than in the games, the games play after the events of the show.
As seen in Dandelion being at the feast when they find out that Pavetta is pregnant with Ciri and Ciri being some 20ish in the third game.
Post

Re: The Witcher 3: The Wild Hunt

#420
Zanteogo wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 6:12 pm
Cornflakes_91 wrote:
Wed Oct 07, 2020 12:33 am
They changed not much, except condensing.
Being as the show has been labeled a success maybe they will take their time in future seasons knowing they have multiple seasons to tell the story. Assuming Netflix survives that long. Doesn't look like they are doing that good.

Though I am sure someone would pick them up.
The stuff they cut really was unnecessary for anything. (like the aforementioned exchange between geralt and istredd, or shortened the story of how duny and pavetta came together and so on)

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

cron