Hilarious thing is, your assessment of Geralt is exactly canon. Him being all dolled up in Witcher 3 and Netflix is far removed from the freakshow he's supposed to be.
I really resonate with the weariness of the overbearing grim-darkness in modern fantasy. It can really elevate certain stories when it's used as an element to make a point (or when cranked up to 11 for aesthetics like in 40k). The issue I keep coming across and that you pointed out (especially since I read a lot of fantasy novels and webnovels) is how horrible people/horrible situations that the main character is subjected to becomes the main draw of the story with few truly good or redeemable characters that aren't unceremoniously killed off or defiled.
You've made some great points. I personally find Geralt to be fairly relatable in 3, and I found myself actually caring about the *victims* of the abuse that the game's story is so full of. And I at least enjoy the monster-hunter-ness of fulfilling a contract that's way above my level. But that's the only Witcher game I've played, and if the first 2 are the way you say they are, maybe it's best if I don't play the older games in the series. The main issue with 3 for me is that I so often run into situations where the most intuitive course of action isn't even an option. Example: You've just won a high-stakes Gwent tournament, with a promised grand prize of 9000 crowns (more than the emperor himself promises you for the safe return of SPOILER). Someone's stolen the prize money. You try to track the thieves down, but someone insists on tailing you the whole time, then when you finally recover the money, insists that you should split the prize halfway because you've "recovered it together" - and the game doesn't even let you try to keep it all.
I'm amazed at how fungus has both simultaneously grasped the major concept of The Witcher (novels, where game 1 and 2 heavily draw from) and completely missed it. I did not enjoy the Witcher 1 and 2, I found them lacklustre and they really struggled to pique my interest despite being an avid fantasy reader. That being said, I really enjoyed Wild Hunt. It had everything that I could ask for in a fantasy game. A broad bestiary that appealed majorly to my wont to categorise mythological creatures as well as a vast armoury that players could choose and balance how they saw fit. Not to mention the character customisation, pouring points into heavy/light/alchemical/magical branches of combat and the story was more enjoyable. Geralt himself was a more enjoyable person to be around, but the choices were simplified. There are some decisions in Wild Hunt that are morally harder to make but most of the time your in game decisions either had a good, okay, less desirable or a bad outcome that was reliant on how you behaved earlier in the game. But your critique is based on the first two games and the first two books. You highlighted that you didn't like being shoehorned into playing as one character and that is an issue with some RPG's. Forcing players into one character runs the risk of alienating part of your audience as it limits players abilities to roleplay and project onto a character of their own design. If you're willing to do that to a player-base and you can execute it well, then the rewards are bountiful. You scraped the surface of it in your video but I would've really liked to see you expand on your point of being able to go into a "deeper dive" because I feel that's the exact reason that CD Projekt chose The Witcher, and more importantly Geralt, as source material for their games. CD Projekt just missed the mark with it on 1 and 2 and their ambitions outweighed their abilities. I do agree that Geralt is a repulsive character and that is 100% the way he was written. He's not a knight in shining armour, he is an ugly, scarred and sinewy character that is meant to illicit feelings of uncanny valley. Despite being well educated, he is uncouth, snobbish and generally an asshole. Amid constant claims that he's outwardly emotionally vacant you will find he's still quite an emotionally complex character, regularly displaying traits of love, jealousy, disloyalty, anxiety and fear. He's antisocial in a way that is jarring to an audience that isn't really open to him and I can see why you clashed with him. If your understanding of maturity is dick sucking jokes being inappropriate for a younger audience then you need to reevaluate your understanding of maturity. Racism, misogyny, violence and a complex political story are what make The Witcher a more mature story. The obvious analogy of non-humans being treated as less than and fringe members of society directly correlate to human stories that I'm not sure you were fully prepared to accept, or completely overlooked. The elvish folk in these novels and games, despite coming with the conjunction, are analogous with indigenous peoples worldwide. A theme explored heavily throughout both the books and the games. You claim Sapkowski has a "perverse fascination with the worst of human behaviour". I find this statement to be unfair. At times his writing can appear gratuitous towards rape and violence but it must be noted that there is never a time in the novels where it is glorified. The reaction each time is a human reaction, despair, anger, fear and sorrow. It is the worst of human behaviour and it's an exceedingly common and increasing part of global society. Misogyny, rape and violence against women is an inescapable and large part of warfare both modern and historical. You praise Assassin of Kings for being colourful because "that's the way it was in mediaeval times, they had colour" and then condemn it 5 minutes later for portraying an accuracy of not just then, but now? Another claim you make is that a morally grey decision is only hard to make if you care for the outcome. So remove the morals from the question and it becomes about ethics, which is still just as difficult a question to approach. You're so correct, every option Geralt is given is given by two despicable people with horrible ethical moral alignments and that is the whole point, that is the whole sum of Geralt's moral compass and something he is constantly grappling with. "Evil is evil. Greater, lesser, middling. If I'm to choose between one evil and another, I'd rather not choose at all." He'd rather not choose but his hand is always forced. Despite having an understanding of complex themes, examples you gave from other media fell short. Mass Effect did not have complex decisions and there was no real gravity to your decisions, every decision was clearly telegraphed. Dragon Age: Origins, despite being an awesome game was also fairly safe. The Warden was a blank slate character that the player could project and build around themselves and relate to; the opposite of Geralt. In summary, your points are objectively correct as individual statements but fall apart under scrutiny. Despite having an understanding of complex themes, examples you gave from other media fell short and the direction you approached, atop your intellectual high horse, the admonishment of the consumers of media that differs from your preferred slop is where you ultimately fall short. You had an opportunity to create a well worded video essay with just a little more analysis of all your source material (all novels/all games) but you instead chose to reinforce an interesting opinion with weak arguments and faux-intellectualism. I think what you're looking for, Fungus, is not Geralt the Witcher but Geralt the Knight. a morally safe and blank slate character that you can project onto and distract yourself from the realities of the world. Which is perfectly okay, but to drag down an entire franchise of novels/games with a well established fanbase while doing so? It doesn't shine you in the best light I'm afraid.
@@nonessentialfungus Haha, did you read the comment though? I genuinely think you can do better material. Read all the books and play the final game, I really would like to hear you argue the point again after genuinely analysing the source.
You seem to be arguing in good faith, so I'll just say this: I get short with Witcher fans, because so many of them are all too eager to dump on other games (usually from BioWare or Bethesda), yet respond to slightest criticism with complete hostility, as if the notion of differing opinions didn't exist. In other words, they can dish it out, but they sure as hell can't take it. There's a reason why they're widely mocked on the gamingcirclejerk subreddit. Second, as I said in the video, this is not a review. Doing a deep-dive into the games would require me to play through them from start to finish, which is not an insignificant amount of time (30-40 hours per game, perhaps more), and I have no desire to spend that much time with a game I dislike. Third, and this is something every Witcher fan needs to get through their head: People will dislike things you enjoy, and their reasons for disliking it may strike you as shallow, invalid, or absurd. But the thing is, you are not going to be able to convince them otherwise, except in rare circumstances. Here's an example: suppose Alice and Bob go to see a war movie. It's beautifully shot, masterfully written, and Alice loves it. But Bob hated it. Why? Because he's actually served in the military, and he saw that the movie got the uniforms wrong, the jargon wrong, the ranks wrong, etc. His entire suspension of disbelief was shattered, and as a result he hated the whole experience. Now, is Bob "wrong"? Sure, he didn't touch on the movie's themes, characters, motifs, etc., and you could try explaining them to him in great detail, but chances are you're not going to convince him otherwise. So it is with me and The Witcher. I don't doubt that there's likely a lot of thematic complexity in the games, but having to play as a character I dislike in a world I despise is an insurmountable obstacle.
@@nonessentialfungus I understand getting short with Witcher fans, I get short with Witcher fans too. I didn't actually like the first two games and the third, despite being easier to consume and one of my top 5 is not the greatest game of all time. I'm not a Projekt fan. I don't like them and I think they're not actually that great at making games. I can't help but feel that you should've left your emotion about the fanbase at the door, and gotten away from the insults and admonishment and just put something similar to your comment as your closing statement. I feel that it would've made it easier to accept. All you really achieved with that was insulting a bunch of people who might not have been so hardline in the first place and willing to listen to your point of view. After reading your comment I completely understand why you mightn't want to play the games if you dislike Geralt and the universe that much. Anyway, it's 0300 and I'm tired. Night night
I don't like chocolate ice cream, I don't like pizza, I like diet soda. Some things just aren't up a person's particular alley, cool beans. Some things are just objectively bad, but the Witcher is not one of them... The Netflix series is an exception to that claim, though.
My sister lent me the Witcher 3 many years ago and insisted it's an amazing game. Tried it out, got decently far into it, but I wasn't really having fun with it, but I couldn't figure out why. This video opened my eyes to possibly having the same issues as you presented here, so thank you for this video!
As a polish person I can tell you that this type of swearing and fighting is very normal and there havent been a day I haven't see it or heard it when growing up there, so the game "atmosphere" is just polish back yard
Again, I wonder if that's similar to my issue with the books, in that there was something not getting translated from the original. Because a lot of the dialogue in the books (and games) has this chopped up feel, consisting of short, barking sentences filled with profanity. So if I hear conversation that sounds something like this: "Shit's fucked up." "What fucking shit?" "Fucking all of it. You fucking stupid or something?" Then, as a native English speaker, it sounds incredibly obnoxious, like the writer is trying way too hard to be David Mamet or something.
@@nonessentialfungus I would say it is down to our language and the way we speak. When walking through the streets of novigrad I feel like I am walking through my childhood playground where kids ages between 5 and 17 are all spending time "together" (as in in the same space) so everyone is cursing as much as possible. Not to mention that in poland football is a huge thing but more like football huligans. something taken straing out of films, I had older friends who would get on a train with friends because they had a "set up" where about 100 guys on each side (two different football teams) would meat up with planks, metal bars etc to show who is boss. As a kid I even saw things like police coming to our block because the guy was beating up the wife aand the moment the police go inside several men run outside and flip the car on the side. Now to me as a person that lived in a different country for a long time sounds downright insane and impossible but as a child (i was about 9 or 10 at the time) this type of stuff was happening before my very eyes and sometimes I was part of it myself. Of course not all of poland is like that but there is a large part that is. Another incident that I had on my visit this year is I tried to ask a man how to get to the other side of a train station very politely i would like to underilne and he replied as follows ( this is direct translation ) "f*ck off you broken d*ck or i will f*ck you up... Sometimes I forget poland can be like that
@@nonessentialfungus Yes - In polish we have very colorful swears. Some of which Andrzej Sapkowski INVENTED in the book. You can't translate that to English unless you start inventing new swears yourself. The barking tone is also something that can work in polish pretty well. Especially for brooding atmosphere OR if you want to convey that the characters are just stupid brutes who can't read or spell single word correctly. There is a lot of that in books.
And YES, The Witcher is the series that appeals the most to middle-grader boy's mind at certain points because the author is very immature himself. However it really has some well delivered moments and parallels to polish everyday life before the internet age. (So up until 1990's in Poland)
@@nc956 >author is very immature himself Are you implying that various forms of the word "nipples" and frequent mentions of vaginal scabies somehow makes an author immature? Damn, man, no need to punch down, sapkowski's life is already difficult - he lives in eastern europe afterall
See, to fully understand these characters, you have to read the books Then, and only then, will you be able to feel what you are supposed to feel: like you're having a stroke, since the characters you know from the books are nowhere like they are in the books
Well I can definitely can see where you're coming from with your points and at times the Witcher can be very much just an edgy and adds "mature" content just for the sake of being edgy and dark. But I do think in mainly the witcher 3 and the books that's there's also a lot of room for compassionate kind and good characters that you're missing out on and that Geralt can be more than just a washed up 90s rockstar, but for real, there's a big change of tone in the third game and I think the edginess is balanced much more. And without going too deeply into the books, I think if you stuck with them a bit more you might have a more positive prospective about them! Anyway just sharing my take no hate or offense taken of course
While I agree with some of your points, I do think mature themes CAN have a place in fantasy worlds as those can be valuable vehicles for exploring these themes outside of the context of our own world. This can give writers the room to make viewers question their presumptions or raise certain questions without getting into a murky political debate. On the other side, I do think there is also space for the more escapist and light-hearted fantasy worlds you describe. They're just different things that serve different purposes.
It's so weird how things just explode in popularity for no discernable reason. The books are meh at best, I don't like the world and I have no desire to touch the games.
I have tried multiple times over the years to play through the first Witcher game and I just can't do it. I find it dreadfully tedious and dull, and this is coming from someone who loves Morrowind.
I have only played the Witcher 3 and I loved it but mainly because of the world. I always loved worlds with a lot of creatures, I watched Supernatural back in the days for this reason as well. I did not like Geralt at first but then I did but I never liked Ciri at all. Everyone seems to just be in love with her and I just could not care about her. The two DLC were fire though.
Hey, the Witcher is not for everyone. Maybe you enjoy a fantasy that is more like The Hobbit, Lord of the rings, Harry Potter and such, i dunno. But to say that the Witcher is nasty for the sake of being nasty is just wrong to be honest
I have tried to like this stuff. Listened to the books and they couldn’t keep my attention. Played a few hours into Witcher 3 and it just didn’t hit anything with me. Kind of a clinical attempt at fantasy. Very focus grouped.
Ι really liked you video and, good luck in your beggining as a channel, hope u grow, You mentioned dragon age origins, i love that game to death it was also one of my first rpgs, are you going to make a video on that?
Random guess: You don't like Gothic 2 aswell? Since that fills a similar niche of... polish/european taste. (overall it sounds like critique of Dark Fantasy from a High Fantasy perspective regarding tropes, topics, background and culture)
To those who agree with this ( or the author himself if you're reading). Could you recommend a fantasy game/ books series you did enjoy so i can better appreciate your point of view? Mass effect was the only example here and i feel it suffers from the same issues except for the fact shepard is an attactive person. Im not being sarcastic i would really appreciate a new saga to read/play regardless of the genre.
Thank you for your well thought out video. Everyone has their own opinions and all of your points are valid. Thanks for making me want to play my one of my favorite video game series of all time again! 😂
I think you overly dramatisize certain points, and your criticism is somewhat shallow about the others, but frankly I don't care - more Witcher critique is always good in my books! :D Personally, other than not caring about anyone, the main thing I don't like about Witcher is how blatantly obvious it's biases are, and how blindly people defend them. I mean, Geralt is one of the most OP wish fulfillment characters... ever! He's both great warrior, great (kinda; at least he has magic, and it's efficient) mage and worlds greatest detective, we are told people hate and distrust him, but only dumb, poor and inconsequential or bad evil people, other than them he's friends with lords, ladies, kings, queens, bards, sorceresses, you name it he has it. We are told he's off-putting looking, but he still has all the interesting named female characters either in his bed or readily flirting with him. And speaking of named sorceresses - why are ALL of them sexy, slutty and flirty with Geralt? I mean, I know lore reasons, beautifying magics and female charm used for intrigue, plus Geralt's sterile, bur "realistically" even with such (cope) reasons some of them would've been different. Because, you know, people are different. And given the same prompts they act differently. But because Sapkowsky wants his eye candy cake and eat it too, he bends their reasons and characters to appeal to Geralt. And at the same time, especially if you read the books, Geralt is not some kind of brute, no sir, he's soo poetic and romantic inside you guys, every fling is personal, every sex scene described as deep and meaningful.
I just disagree with your last sentence. Yes he has deep and meaningful romantic relationship with Yennefer, the rest are pretty much just one night stands types of relationships.
@@igorribicic8809 I've read Witcher books in Slavic language and I can remember at least two sex scenes with women other than Yennifer which were described as very romantically and existentially deep and touching. With medic student girl, and in library with some noble lady in some noble land where ladies make wine. I mean of course those - and all potential others there is/was/may be are one night stands, but my point wasn't about Geralt having meaningful relationships with all those women. My point was his conquests never described as conquests, it's always some romantic philosophical profound connection. Which serves as another example of Sapkowski having his cake and eating it too - so Geralt fucks around, but he can't be some boorish fuckboy, he is also so deep and romantic you guys!
The biggest hurdle to me enjoying the witcher (I only played 3) was the fact that it forces you into playing as someone else. In my opinion this is a horrible choice for a role playing game, especially for me since I personally just didn't like Geralt at all. However after giving the game a chance I still had a good time, because the world itself is so well thought out and FULL of little details and storylines. Yes it's grim, and its true that many of the interactions in the game are needlessly violent or 'evil' just for the sake of it. But the overal story was interesting enough for me to look past that, especially the DLC which is just superior to the main game in my opinion. And I did eventually get invested in some of the recurring characters like Ciri. After beating Witcher 3 I tried to go back and play witcher 1 and 2, but I couldn't get into it in the same way. Where the Witcher 3 is worth experiencing for the gameworld alone, witcher 1 and 2 didn't manage to hold my attention. If you want to give this franchise a try I'd really recommend just playing Witcher 3 and going from there.
You should play Wticher 3 before making videos such as this because at least 90% of the fan base of The Witcher got into it after the third game released, of course you're going to get angry comments, also you just shat on the fan base with the little comment about the target audience 7:10, some of your points were in fact true, but this video is mostly rage baiting - "Dislike button is to the right" :D dear god...
Doesn't want witcher Fans to see the video, the who's this for then? hahaaha had to open up and see whats what, ahahaha always open to a different opinion though! =)
"Witcher fans are fragile" Lol that's so true. everytime someone commented that x game is the best rpg, then Witcher fans be like -but what about witcher 3 -witcher 3 exist -bro dont know witcher 3 Lol pleas stop.
You don't think this might be the case becuase such a massive audience really enjoyed the witcher 3 they just want to share their enjoyment of the game with other people? Why is a negative thing talking about a thing which people clearly like?
@@Nesque well that's because i saw that very often, it's cringed. Like i wanted to know if x game worh buying if more people validate this "x game is best rpg" take in the reply. But reply has become war zone because there's always witcher 3 fans saying things like "nah witcher 3 better "..
Ngl, I don’t really see the appeal in the games unless you’ve read the entire book series. Also how the hell do non-book readers have any idea of what’s going on in the plot of TW3?
Hilarious thing is, your assessment of Geralt is exactly canon. Him being all dolled up in Witcher 3 and Netflix is far removed from the freakshow he's supposed to be.
😮
I respectfully disagree with you're point of view. Have a nice day
you're
I really resonate with the weariness of the overbearing grim-darkness in modern fantasy.
It can really elevate certain stories when it's used as an element to make a point (or when cranked up to 11 for aesthetics like in 40k).
The issue I keep coming across and that you pointed out (especially since I read a lot of fantasy novels and webnovels) is how horrible people/horrible situations that the main character is subjected to becomes the main draw of the story with few truly good or redeemable characters that aren't unceremoniously killed off or defiled.
You've made some great points.
I personally find Geralt to be fairly relatable in 3, and I found myself actually caring about the *victims* of the abuse that the game's story is so full of. And I at least enjoy the monster-hunter-ness of fulfilling a contract that's way above my level. But that's the only Witcher game I've played, and if the first 2 are the way you say they are, maybe it's best if I don't play the older games in the series.
The main issue with 3 for me is that I so often run into situations where the most intuitive course of action isn't even an option.
Example: You've just won a high-stakes Gwent tournament, with a promised grand prize of 9000 crowns (more than the emperor himself promises you for the safe return of SPOILER). Someone's stolen the prize money. You try to track the thieves down, but someone insists on tailing you the whole time, then when you finally recover the money, insists that you should split the prize halfway because you've "recovered it together" - and the game doesn't even let you try to keep it all.
I'm amazed at how fungus has both simultaneously grasped the major concept of The Witcher (novels, where game 1 and 2 heavily draw from) and completely missed it. I did not enjoy the Witcher 1 and 2, I found them lacklustre and they really struggled to pique my interest despite being an avid fantasy reader. That being said, I really enjoyed Wild Hunt. It had everything that I could ask for in a fantasy game. A broad bestiary that appealed majorly to my wont to categorise mythological creatures as well as a vast armoury that players could choose and balance how they saw fit. Not to mention the character customisation, pouring points into heavy/light/alchemical/magical branches of combat and the story was more enjoyable. Geralt himself was a more enjoyable person to be around, but the choices were simplified. There are some decisions in Wild Hunt that are morally harder to make but most of the time your in game decisions either had a good, okay, less desirable or a bad outcome that was reliant on how you behaved earlier in the game. But your critique is based on the first two games and the first two books. You highlighted that you didn't like being shoehorned into playing as one character and that is an issue with some RPG's. Forcing players into one character runs the risk of alienating part of your audience as it limits players abilities to roleplay and project onto a character of their own design. If you're willing to do that to a player-base and you can execute it well, then the rewards are bountiful. You scraped the surface of it in your video but I would've really liked to see you expand on your point of being able to go into a "deeper dive" because I feel that's the exact reason that CD Projekt chose The Witcher, and more importantly Geralt, as source material for their games. CD Projekt just missed the mark with it on 1 and 2 and their ambitions outweighed their abilities. I do agree that Geralt is a repulsive character and that is 100% the way he was written. He's not a knight in shining armour, he is an ugly, scarred and sinewy character that is meant to illicit feelings of uncanny valley. Despite being well educated, he is uncouth, snobbish and generally an asshole. Amid constant claims that he's outwardly emotionally vacant you will find he's still quite an emotionally complex character, regularly displaying traits of love, jealousy, disloyalty, anxiety and fear. He's antisocial in a way that is jarring to an audience that isn't really open to him and I can see why you clashed with him. If your understanding of maturity is dick sucking jokes being inappropriate for a younger audience then you need to reevaluate your understanding of maturity. Racism, misogyny, violence and a complex political story are what make The Witcher a more mature story. The obvious analogy of non-humans being treated as less than and fringe members of society directly correlate to human stories that I'm not sure you were fully prepared to accept, or completely overlooked. The elvish folk in these novels and games, despite coming with the conjunction, are analogous with indigenous peoples worldwide. A theme explored heavily throughout both the books and the games. You claim Sapkowski has a "perverse fascination with the worst of human behaviour". I find this statement to be unfair. At times his writing can appear gratuitous towards rape and violence but it must be noted that there is never a time in the novels where it is glorified. The reaction each time is a human reaction, despair, anger, fear and sorrow. It is the worst of human behaviour and it's an exceedingly common and increasing part of global society. Misogyny, rape and violence against women is an inescapable and large part of warfare both modern and historical. You praise Assassin of Kings for being colourful because "that's the way it was in mediaeval times, they had colour" and then condemn it 5 minutes later for portraying an accuracy of not just then, but now? Another claim you make is that a morally grey decision is only hard to make if you care for the outcome. So remove the morals from the question and it becomes about ethics, which is still just as difficult a question to approach. You're so correct, every option Geralt is given is given by two despicable people with horrible ethical moral alignments and that is the whole point, that is the whole sum of Geralt's moral compass and something he is constantly grappling with. "Evil is evil. Greater, lesser, middling. If I'm to choose between one evil and another, I'd rather not choose at all." He'd rather not choose but his hand is always forced. Despite having an understanding of complex themes, examples you gave from other media fell short. Mass Effect did not have complex decisions and there was no real gravity to your decisions, every decision was clearly telegraphed. Dragon Age: Origins, despite being an awesome game was also fairly safe. The Warden was a blank slate character that the player could project and build around themselves and relate to; the opposite of Geralt. In summary, your points are objectively correct as individual statements but fall apart under scrutiny. Despite having an understanding of complex themes, examples you gave from other media fell short and the direction you approached, atop your intellectual high horse, the admonishment of the consumers of media that differs from your preferred slop is where you ultimately fall short. You had an opportunity to create a well worded video essay with just a little more analysis of all your source material (all novels/all games) but you instead chose to reinforce an interesting opinion with weak arguments and faux-intellectualism. I think what you're looking for, Fungus, is not Geralt the Witcher but Geralt the Knight. a morally safe and blank slate character that you can project onto and distract yourself from the realities of the world. Which is perfectly okay, but to drag down an entire franchise of novels/games with a well established fanbase while doing so? It doesn't shine you in the best light I'm afraid.
"Dislike button is to the right" lmao
Sir, this is a Wendy's
@@nonessentialfungus Haha, did you read the comment though? I genuinely think you can do better material. Read all the books and play the final game, I really would like to hear you argue the point again after genuinely analysing the source.
You seem to be arguing in good faith, so I'll just say this: I get short with Witcher fans, because so many of them are all too eager to dump on other games (usually from BioWare or Bethesda), yet respond to slightest criticism with complete hostility, as if the notion of differing opinions didn't exist. In other words, they can dish it out, but they sure as hell can't take it. There's a reason why they're widely mocked on the gamingcirclejerk subreddit.
Second, as I said in the video, this is not a review. Doing a deep-dive into the games would require me to play through them from start to finish, which is not an insignificant amount of time (30-40 hours per game, perhaps more), and I have no desire to spend that much time with a game I dislike.
Third, and this is something every Witcher fan needs to get through their head: People will dislike things you enjoy, and their reasons for disliking it may strike you as shallow, invalid, or absurd. But the thing is, you are not going to be able to convince them otherwise, except in rare circumstances. Here's an example: suppose Alice and Bob go to see a war movie. It's beautifully shot, masterfully written, and Alice loves it. But Bob hated it. Why? Because he's actually served in the military, and he saw that the movie got the uniforms wrong, the jargon wrong, the ranks wrong, etc. His entire suspension of disbelief was shattered, and as a result he hated the whole experience.
Now, is Bob "wrong"? Sure, he didn't touch on the movie's themes, characters, motifs, etc., and you could try explaining them to him in great detail, but chances are you're not going to convince him otherwise.
So it is with me and The Witcher. I don't doubt that there's likely a lot of thematic complexity in the games, but having to play as a character I dislike in a world I despise is an insurmountable obstacle.
@@nonessentialfungus I understand getting short with Witcher fans, I get short with Witcher fans too. I didn't actually like the first two games and the third, despite being easier to consume and one of my top 5 is not the greatest game of all time. I'm not a Projekt fan. I don't like them and I think they're not actually that great at making games.
I can't help but feel that you should've left your emotion about the fanbase at the door, and gotten away from the insults and admonishment and just put something similar to your comment as your closing statement. I feel that it would've made it easier to accept. All you really achieved with that was insulting a bunch of people who might not have been so hardline in the first place and willing to listen to your point of view. After reading your comment I completely understand why you mightn't want to play the games if you dislike Geralt and the universe that much.
Anyway, it's 0300 and I'm tired. Night night
I don't like chocolate ice cream, I don't like pizza, I like diet soda.
Some things just aren't up a person's particular alley, cool beans.
Some things are just objectively bad, but the Witcher is not one of them... The Netflix series is an exception to that claim, though.
My sister lent me the Witcher 3 many years ago and insisted it's an amazing game. Tried it out, got decently far into it, but I wasn't really having fun with it, but I couldn't figure out why. This video opened my eyes to possibly having the same issues as you presented here, so thank you for this video!
As a polish person I can tell you that this type of swearing and fighting is very normal and there havent been a day I haven't see it or heard it when growing up there, so the game "atmosphere" is just polish back yard
Again, I wonder if that's similar to my issue with the books, in that there was something not getting translated from the original. Because a lot of the dialogue in the books (and games) has this chopped up feel, consisting of short, barking sentences filled with profanity. So if I hear conversation that sounds something like this:
"Shit's fucked up."
"What fucking shit?"
"Fucking all of it. You fucking stupid or something?"
Then, as a native English speaker, it sounds incredibly obnoxious, like the writer is trying way too hard to be David Mamet or something.
@@nonessentialfungus I would say it is down to our language and the way we speak. When walking through the streets of novigrad I feel like I am walking through my childhood playground where kids ages between 5 and 17 are all spending time "together" (as in in the same space) so everyone is cursing as much as possible. Not to mention that in poland football is a huge thing but more like football huligans. something taken straing out of films, I had older friends who would get on a train with friends because they had a "set up" where about 100 guys on each side (two different football teams) would meat up with planks, metal bars etc to show who is boss. As a kid I even saw things like police coming to our block because the guy was beating up the wife aand the moment the police go inside several men run outside and flip the car on the side. Now to me as a person that lived in a different country for a long time sounds downright insane and impossible but as a child (i was about 9 or 10 at the time) this type of stuff was happening before my very eyes and sometimes I was part of it myself. Of course not all of poland is like that but there is a large part that is.
Another incident that I had on my visit this year is I tried to ask a man how to get to the other side of a train station very politely i would like to underilne and he replied as follows ( this is direct translation ) "f*ck off you broken d*ck or i will f*ck you up... Sometimes I forget poland can be like that
@@nonessentialfungus
Yes - In polish we have very colorful swears. Some of which Andrzej Sapkowski INVENTED in the book. You can't translate that to English unless you start inventing new swears yourself.
The barking tone is also something that can work in polish pretty well. Especially for brooding atmosphere OR if you want to convey that the characters are just stupid brutes who can't read or spell single word correctly. There is a lot of that in books.
And YES, The Witcher is the series that appeals the most to middle-grader boy's mind at certain points because the author is very immature himself. However it really has some well delivered moments and parallels to polish everyday life before the internet age. (So up until 1990's in Poland)
@@nc956 >author is very immature himself
Are you implying that various forms of the word "nipples" and frequent mentions of vaginal scabies somehow makes an author immature? Damn, man, no need to punch down, sapkowski's life is already difficult - he lives in eastern europe afterall
See, to fully understand these characters, you have to read the books
Then, and only then, will you be able to feel what you are supposed to feel: like you're having a stroke, since the characters you know from the books are nowhere like they are in the books
I loved your descpription of Geralt being a washed up rocker trying to live out his glory days ahahahahhah a
that's just Johnny Silverhand
Well I can definitely can see where you're coming from with your points and at times the Witcher can be very much just an edgy and adds "mature" content just for the sake of being edgy and dark. But I do think in mainly the witcher 3 and the books that's there's also a lot of room for compassionate kind and good characters that you're missing out on and that Geralt can be more than just a washed up 90s rockstar, but for real, there's a big change of tone in the third game and I think the edginess is balanced much more. And without going too deeply into the books, I think if you stuck with them a bit more you might have a more positive prospective about them! Anyway just sharing my take no hate or offense taken of course
7/10 ragebait but purely beacue it attacked my polish identity otherwise 5/10
While I agree with some of your points, I do think mature themes CAN have a place in fantasy worlds as those can be valuable vehicles for exploring these themes outside of the context of our own world. This can give writers the room to make viewers question their presumptions or raise certain questions without getting into a murky political debate. On the other side, I do think there is also space for the more escapist and light-hearted fantasy worlds you describe. They're just different things that serve different purposes.
a bit over dramatized, but hilarious
It's so weird how things just explode in popularity for no discernable reason. The books are meh at best, I don't like the world and I have no desire to touch the games.
I have tried multiple times over the years to play through the first Witcher game and I just can't do it. I find it dreadfully tedious and dull, and this is coming from someone who loves Morrowind.
I have only played the Witcher 3 and I loved it but mainly because of the world. I always loved worlds with a lot of creatures, I watched Supernatural back in the days for this reason as well. I did not like Geralt at first but then I did but I never liked Ciri at all. Everyone seems to just be in love with her and I just could not care about her. The two DLC were fire though.
Hey, the Witcher is not for everyone.
Maybe you enjoy a fantasy that is more like The Hobbit, Lord of the rings, Harry Potter and such, i dunno.
But to say that the Witcher is nasty for the sake of being nasty is just wrong to be honest
I have tried to like this stuff. Listened to the books and they couldn’t keep my attention. Played a few hours into Witcher 3 and it just didn’t hit anything with me. Kind of a clinical attempt at fantasy. Very focus grouped.
It's perfectly fine to not like the Witcher, but you should not speek negative about those who like it...
Ι really liked you video and, good luck in your beggining as a channel, hope u grow, You mentioned dragon age origins, i love that game to death it was also one of my first rpgs, are you going to make a video on that?
so you have chosen death
Random guess: You don't like Gothic 2 aswell?
Since that fills a similar niche of... polish/european taste.
(overall it sounds like critique of Dark Fantasy from a High Fantasy perspective regarding tropes, topics, background and culture)
To those who agree with this ( or the author himself if you're reading). Could you recommend a fantasy game/ books series you did enjoy so i can better appreciate your point of view? Mass effect was the only example here and i feel it suffers from the same issues except for the fact shepard is an attactive person. Im not being sarcastic i would really appreciate a new saga to read/play regardless of the genre.
Thank you for your well thought out video. Everyone has their own opinions and all of your points are valid. Thanks for making me want to play my one of my favorite video game series of all time again! 😂
I like the books, didnt't connect with the games, though I only played witcher 3. Predefined characters in rpgs kinda suck, gotta agree with that
I feel this is exactly why I dislike berzerk, too.
I think you overly dramatisize certain points, and your criticism is somewhat shallow about the others, but frankly I don't care - more Witcher critique is always good in my books! :D
Personally, other than not caring about anyone, the main thing I don't like about Witcher is how blatantly obvious it's biases are, and how blindly people defend them. I mean, Geralt is one of the most OP wish fulfillment characters... ever! He's both great warrior, great (kinda; at least he has magic, and it's efficient) mage and worlds greatest detective, we are told people hate and distrust him, but only dumb, poor and inconsequential or bad evil people, other than them he's friends with lords, ladies, kings, queens, bards, sorceresses, you name it he has it. We are told he's off-putting looking, but he still has all the interesting named female characters either in his bed or readily flirting with him. And speaking of named sorceresses - why are ALL of them sexy, slutty and flirty with Geralt? I mean, I know lore reasons, beautifying magics and female charm used for intrigue, plus Geralt's sterile, bur "realistically" even with such (cope) reasons some of them would've been different. Because, you know, people are different. And given the same prompts they act differently. But because Sapkowsky wants his eye candy cake and eat it too, he bends their reasons and characters to appeal to Geralt. And at the same time, especially if you read the books, Geralt is not some kind of brute, no sir, he's soo poetic and romantic inside you guys, every fling is personal, every sex scene described as deep and meaningful.
I just disagree with your last sentence. Yes he has deep and meaningful romantic relationship with Yennefer, the rest are pretty much just one night stands types of relationships.
@@igorribicic8809 I've read Witcher books in Slavic language and I can remember at least two sex scenes with women other than Yennifer which were described as very romantically and existentially deep and touching. With medic student girl, and in library with some noble lady in some noble land where ladies make wine. I mean of course those - and all potential others there is/was/may be are one night stands, but my point wasn't about Geralt having meaningful relationships with all those women. My point was his conquests never described as conquests, it's always some romantic philosophical profound connection. Which serves as another example of Sapkowski having his cake and eating it too - so Geralt fucks around, but he can't be some boorish fuckboy, he is also so deep and romantic you guys!
The biggest hurdle to me enjoying the witcher (I only played 3) was the fact that it forces you into playing as someone else. In my opinion this is a horrible choice for a role playing game, especially for me since I personally just didn't like Geralt at all. However after giving the game a chance I still had a good time, because the world itself is so well thought out and FULL of little details and storylines.
Yes it's grim, and its true that many of the interactions in the game are needlessly violent or 'evil' just for the sake of it. But the overal story was interesting enough for me to look past that, especially the DLC which is just superior to the main game in my opinion. And I did eventually get invested in some of the recurring characters like Ciri.
After beating Witcher 3 I tried to go back and play witcher 1 and 2, but I couldn't get into it in the same way. Where the Witcher 3 is worth experiencing for the gameworld alone, witcher 1 and 2 didn't manage to hold my attention. If you want to give this franchise a try I'd really recommend just playing Witcher 3 and going from there.
Yes, you don't care so game is not for you. The end.
Horse tranquilizer voice. Accurate 😂
its just a game dude , ur taking it too seriously
You should play Wticher 3 before making videos such as this because at least 90% of the fan base of The Witcher got into it after the third game released, of course you're going to get angry comments, also you just shat on the fan base with the little comment about the target audience 7:10, some of your points were in fact true, but this video is mostly rage baiting - "Dislike button is to the right" :D dear god...
Doesn't want witcher Fans to see the video, the who's this for then? hahaaha had to open up and see whats what, ahahaha always open to a different opinion though! =)
"Witcher fans are fragile"
Lol that's so true.
everytime someone commented that x game is the best rpg, then Witcher fans be like
-but what about witcher 3
-witcher 3 exist
-bro dont know witcher 3
Lol pleas stop.
But don't you EVER call them fragile, or suddenly it's "HOW DARE YOU, SIR?"
You don't think this might be the case becuase such a massive audience really enjoyed the witcher 3 they just want to share their enjoyment of the game with other people? Why is a negative thing talking about a thing which people clearly like?
@@Nesque well that's because i saw that very often, it's cringed.
Like i wanted to know if x game worh buying if more people validate this "x game is best rpg" take in the reply. But reply has become war zone because there's always witcher 3 fans saying things like "nah witcher 3 better "..
Ngl, I don’t really see the appeal in the games unless you’ve read the entire book series.
Also how the hell do non-book readers have any idea of what’s going on in the plot of TW3?
You HAVE to play witcher 3 you owe it to yourself bro
Haven’t really played 1 & 2 and tbh don’t care about em all that much but the 1st two mins if that vid i just cant handle that kinda do douche baggary
We witcher fans enter chat 😂