Are the Witcher books worth reading?

Are the Witcher books worth reading?

I would be interested in knowing how much of it is adventures with Geralt vs political intrigue with kings and sorceresses.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=XuU5Z-Cn25s
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>Are the Witcher books worth reading?
i don't know

The author apparently dislikes the video game, so fuck him.

He's mad because he didn't take the royalty deal over the lump sum with signing over the license. He would have been rich as fuck had he done so.

Regardless, disliking an author is no good reason not to read their books.

In this particular case, I disagree. If the only reason you're reading the Witcher books is because of the game, then the author disliking the game should be indicative that the books are either a very different beast or that the author's stuck so far up his own ass that he's also a shite author.

The netflix/amazon show is going to follow the books more closely so you can pirate those and not have to buy the books.

>then the author disliking the game should be indicative that the books are either a very different beast
This isn't the impression that I've got. From the interviews I've seen, it's indicative that he has a problem with video games as a storytelling medium, not how the Witcher 3 in particular was set up.

>author's stuck so far up his own ass that he's also a shite author.
I don't think it follows that just because an author has irrational opinions it is indicative of the quality of their work.

Veeky Forums everybody.

Can just pirate the books, dude.

I finished The Last Wish yesterday and enjoyed it for the most part. For a series of fantasy short stories they read more like fairy tales re-written for a teenage boy audience substituting moral lessons for rule-of-cool action.

I particularly liked the romantic fairy tale aesthetic. The 'Beauty and the Beast' story in particular made me think of The Witcher world as a place of beautiful stained glass windows, mysterious empty castles, and red-roses and all the metaphors which come with them.

It's fun to see how the author twists fairy tales to his needs, but removing that I was left with a perfectly acceptable set of short stories. The Witcher mythology is interesting, and The Witcher himself makes for a good archetypal hero without seemingly too generic.

As an aside I watched an interview with the author and he said "Philosophers can't be writers." -- What the FUCK did he mean by this?

Can you link that interview? Sounds pretty retarded.

here you go. Watch from 6:36

youtube.com/watch?v=XuU5Z-Cn25s

I'm a retard

Why read a translation when you can just watch the show, which frees up time for other books.

Ok, so he didn't say that philosophers can't be writers. He's saying that philosophers doing philosophy doesn't make them writers insofar as it's not storytelling in the same sense as fiction.

Is there gwent in the books?

Only the first to books which are short stories, very enjoyable. Then the series just kicks off revolving around Ciri and a shitty plot.

First two books of short stories are decent reads, recommended.

Actual 5 book saga is completely mediocre and average in every way without a single defining pro that I can remember.

>I don't think it follows that just because an author has irrational opinions it is indicative of the quality of their work.

Of course it does, because the irrational character becomes plainly visible in his work. I think appointing yourself as an authority to judge which are legitimate storytelling mediums in the world and which are not just because you got a publishing contract for genre fiction says anything necessary about the author and the quality of his work. Suddenly he's the king of the world and everyone else is simply leeching off of his ingenuity!

The Last Wish is pretty fun, but everything after that is generic 6 400 page books of needlessly long and boring plots, without substance or interesting characters. In the Blood of Elves you barely get any Geralt, and the Ciri of the novel is just as obnoxious as her video game counterpart, and just like the game, she just interrupts the interesting parts because she's Sapowski's daughterfu. So, read the short stories because they are actually adventures, read the rest if you want a long soap opera.

ah shit I just finished blood of elves and was hoping the next one would be like the first books

It just keeps getting worse and worse. The twist in the last book is kinda nice, but if you played the third game, you already know it, so it's not worth the effort.

>Of course it does, because the irrational character becomes plainly visible in his work.
This is very inductive reasoning. Being biased and irrational when it comes to yourself is not the same as being biased and irrational when writing characters. It could manifest, I don't think it's directly indicative.

>I think appointing yourself as an authority to judge which are legitimate storytelling mediums in the world and which are not just because you got a publishing contract for genre fiction says anything necessary about the author and the quality of his work. Suddenly he's the king of the world and everyone else is simply leeching off of his ingenuity!
It absolutely says something about the author. But to say that it necessarily says something about the quality of his work is to say that one cannot be talented and at the same time condescending and look down on others, which isn't true.

i am polish and this man, in our country he is nobody

the witcher series if my favorite vidya series but i'd never touch the books, don't have time or dick to go through 7 novels of genre fiction. i wouldn't even like it anyway

If you liked a game with mediocre mechanics and an interesting story, chances are you'd likely feel the same towards the source material.

Does Veeky Forums hate reading books or something?

The games are better written.

>Being biased and irrational when it comes to yourself is not the same as being biased and irrational when writing characters

You can't write convincing circles when you're a square and don't even realize it. And his arrogance really does show in the text itself. Many times over the course of the saga, you see tonally detached, ridiculous chapters that are like him saying, "I don't give a fuck about this anymore, but you'll eat it up anyway". The plot and characters fail to remain consistent.

There are authors out there, who can write without putting their ego in the text. Sapkowsky is not one.