Talk:The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt/Archive 1

Archive 1

Comment

This page is a giant advertisement. You can't just "cite" a forum post that pastes a press release and call it good. LOL JK that is exactly what you can do! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.139.48.109 (talk) 05:34, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Linux availability

Linux support was never confirmed for the Witcher 3. All sources used are speculative and use the poster which appeared on the front page of Steam. That poster was removed since, and the preorders available through Steam and GOG don't mention Linux and SteamOS in particular at all. Therefore Linux availability should be removed from the article. Official confirmations from CD Projekt Red, GOG or Valve could clarify the matter. -- Bahaltener (talk) 04:58, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

How is it a CRPG if it's on console?

What the heck? — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheElderFox (talk • contribs) 01:02, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

Actually, it's an action role playing game, not cRPG (considering sources). Sir Lothar (talk) 07:53, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Book connection

Shouldn't it be menioned that plot has stronger connection to original Sapkowski's book series than earlier games, including introducing character of Ciri who was secondary protagonist in the books, and giving bigger focus to the Wild Hunt, who were antagonists of some books in the series?46.112.104.107 (talk) 21:03, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Probably, bare in mind that the article is in a pretty incomplete state currently. It's lacking detail in a bunch of areas. If you have a reliable source to support the addition then feel free to add it. The1337gamer (talk) 21:11, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Witcher III, not "3"

Look at the cover, they've decided to go with Roman in the end (dumb decision, by the way). — Preceding unsigned comment added by TVippy (talk • contribs) 21:53, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

 Done. In case anyone contests the move, see Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(video_games). (For series that use either Arabic numerals or Roman numerals to denote the order of games in the series, use the numerals in the official titles for the games, even if their types vary from game to game). --The1337gamer (talk) 22:25, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

What are you doing? Stylized Roman numerals on the official box art is not the official name of the game. See official website and articles Watch Dogs, Half-Life (video game), Half-Life 2. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 16:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

III and 3 are synonymous. The cover art uses roman numerals so I moved per WP:NCVG. Unlike the cases you just mentioned. For Watch Dogs, underscores should not be used for technical reasons, see WP:TSC. For Half-Life "a" is not synonymous to lambda. For Half-Life 2, "2" is not synonymous to squared. --The1337gamer (talk) 16:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Moved it back. I'll get some other editors to chime in. --The1337gamer (talk) 16:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Okay, but why you take the number from the box art? On the developer's site says "3". Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 16:53, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

I assumed that if the cover art used Roman numerals then that's how it was officially styled, but as you say the dev website differs and other sources use "3" as well so I've changed it back. --The1337gamer (talk) 16:57, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

GOG.com din't sell 690,000 copies yet

GOG.com din't sell 690,000 copies yet. The source says: "...almost 700 thousand gamers worldwide have gone with GOG Galaxy as their monster-huntin’ platform - more than all other PC options combined". Plese remember that Box versions of Witcher 3 are activated through GOG (not Steam as is the case with other games) and are included in this number. We may not tell how many copies was sold by GOG, but it's probably many times less than by Steam. Also we may not tell that "...Witcher 3 was the best-selling video game in the UK in 2015 as of 26 May 2015". The source says it was "...the biggest UK release of the year so far". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.76.125.255 (talk) 19:59, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

• I changed it. Hopefully it is clearer and more accurate now. --The1337gamer (talk) 20:07, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Story/Plot section

The story section is absurdly long and recent edits are making it worse. I'm restoring an old version which is a better template for editors to improve upon. Please read WP:PLOT, WP:PLOTSUM, and WP:WAF before attempting to rewrite the story section. It is meant to be summary, not a written adaptation of the game. --The1337gamer (talk) 15:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

I have a better summary. This is as short as its going to get. This plot is VERY complex, so a longer summary is needed for this game. --Texasgoldrush 29 June 2015

The plot section is far too long and way too dense. It needs to be reduced to half the current length, cut out side quests and only focus on the specific detail that will explain the main story to the reader. Other games just as large as this have managed it; and achieved GA and Featured status. I know removing stuff can feel wrong, but after doing it myself I know that the end result is the correct one. - X201 (talk) 08:28, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Genre

The genre "high-fantasy" is entirely misleading. While there is some traditional fantasy elements in the game, there are too many dark themes and horror elements in the game to call this a high-fantasy. Even the protagonist is regarded as a "mutant" or "monster" by the story, and is morally ambiguous. The dark atmosphere, war-time plot, and low-tone atmosphere also attribute to this. This is hardly something that needs to be referenced by the personal opinions of other sources but a question of a solid definition of the genre and what styles the game actually contains.

If no reliable source states it, then you can't just change based on your opinion, which would be WP:OR. Because of that, I'm changing it to simply say fantasy to avoid any controversy. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 23:38, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2016

CHANGE

The game won multiple Game of the Year awards from various gaming publications, critics, and game award shows, including the Golden Joystick Awards, The Game Awards, and Game Developers Choice Awards.

TO

The game won multiple Game of the Year awards from various gaming publications, critics, and game award shows, including the Golden Joystick Awards, The Game Awards, and Game Developers Choice Awards. It is currently the most awarded game of all time.

References

Suriranyar (talk) 16:11, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

• Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. AdrianGamer (talk) 16:39, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
• None of these sites are listed under WP:VG/RS, so I don't think they count. Also, most GOTY awards doesn't make it automatically the most awarded game of all time in general, so the way you wrote is misleading. Nobody is doubting the fact that this game was given a ton of awards, but the problem (for Wikipedia) is how many of them were notable. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 23:45, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Why Undo my changes

i added a line about it being the highest rated game on PC,Xbox-one,Ps4 on metacritic but it was removed Why? i know wiki don't allow user-reviews abut metacritic is trust worthy site and i quote "For some high profile games, a flurry of user reviews that strongly counter the general consensus of mainstream reviewers (those listed as reliable sources) may exist." here is the case user reviews are reilable with 10K votes on pc and 9k on PS4 so it must be shown on wiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkmsn8 (talk • contribs) 20:18, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

You just answered your own question. "I know wiki don't allow user-reviews". That includes Metacritic user reviews. -- ferret (talk) 22:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

It's redundant anyway, as the Metacritic scores are already in the reception section. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 22:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

so we cant add the line that wicther 3 is highest rated game of all time — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkmsn8 (talk —Preceding undated comment added 07:14, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

No, because it isn't. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 07:45, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

then which game is ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkmsn8 (talk • contribs) 20:47, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Ocarina of Time, actually. -- ferret (talk) 21:11, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

yeah by critics yeah but not by users just saying Watcher 3 deserves acknowledgment in review section atleast — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:205:1304:AB00:16F:684E:E95A:1893 (talk) 18:33, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

That's not how Wikipedia works, sorry. We would need a secondary reliable source to comment on it. We cannot use Metacritic directly for user generated reviews. See WP:USERG again. -- ferret (talk) 18:52, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

The article already states that it won many GOTY awards (factual and verifiable) so isn't that close enough? ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:23, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

ok if its not possible then ok — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkmsn8 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

The Most Awarded game of all time thing

Hi there, i was checking and the witcher 3 is now the most awarded game of all time with 251 GOTY awards, the official Gotypicks page posted this morning, so i was wondering why isn't in the article yet, doesn’t CDPR deserves that recognition? anyway, i'm just a big fan of the game and i think that that mark is amazing and that it should be here, thanks in advance to the the person who answer this. EikeAmdrade (talk) 16:03, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

I second this, the gotypicks page is THE source for what video games win how many awards. Not to mention the last of us wiki page (the game that previously had the title, had this information also. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suriranyar (talk • contribs) 21:55, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

http://gamerant.com/the-witcher-3-gdc-game-of-the-year/ gamerant published this article, in it says that The Witcher 3 is the most awarded game of all time. Does it counts? Because i've seen some other sites publishing that Gotypicks is the official page for GOTY awards, so i think that this proves it. EikeAmdrade (talk) 16:51, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

• Blogspot and GameRant are not included on the list of reliable sources for video game articles. Majority of the awards from the Gotypicks page aren't considered notable by Wikipedia either, so does that still make it the most awarded game of all time? ~ Dissident93 (talk) 22:13, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

• Dissident93, see Game Revolution, Igromania (official page on VK). Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 09:43, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Dissident93, you have not reached agreement with other users. Do not delete reliable sources, confirming that the Witcher 3 is the game of the year in history. "Majority of the awards from the Gotypicks page aren't considered notable by Wikipedia" — If a reputable source refers to them they have importance. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 13:53, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Dissident93 is correct. First, none of those sources support the "More than 800 awards" statement. Second, the "251 game of the year" awards are already covered in the article. Third this is the lead, which summarizes the articles key points. Further expansion on this belongs under Reception/Awards, where again, it already exists. -- ferret (talk) 14:36, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

ferret, what does "more than 800 awards"? This does not apply to our topic. It was about the fact that he won more "game of the year" awards (251) than any other game in history. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 14:56, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Your edit included the text The Witcher 3 has accumulated over 800 awards since its release so I'm not sure how you don't see it as relevant to the topic. I have expanded on the 251 GOTY awards in the awards section using your sources. This is sufficient, please don't keep readding all these sources back to the lead. -- ferret (talk) 15:13, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Oh, yes, I see. Sorry. Thank you. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 15:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

ferret, you added that the game has received 251 awards in the category "game of the year", using my sources, but why don't you let me write that "he won more "game of the year" awards than any other game in history"? About it it is written in my sources. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 15:28, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

"in history" is a bit too peacocky. I've made a tweak to include "the most ever at the time." -- ferret (talk) 15:32, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

At the time? But he is now. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 15:47, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

And tomorrow might not be. The statement is accurate and future proof. -- ferret (talk) 15:50, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Why delete GameRankings reviews?

Why delete GameRankings reviews? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.223.141.19 (talk) 15:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

• WP:VGAGG says "Do not include GameRankings in articles about newer games." This is because the GameRankings score is usually similar to the Metacritic so it doesn't really add anything to the article --The1337gamer (talk) 15:56, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Famous Hobo (talk · contribs) 17:13, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

I'll take this one up. Famous Hobo (talk) 17:13, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry for a bit of a delay, life's been a bit busy lately. Should have some free time tomorrow. Famous Hobo (talk) 17:17, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

@Famous Hobo: Try getting to the review within the month. I'm moving in November. Cognissonance (talk) 17:16, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

@Famous Hobo and Cognissonance: I'd be happy to take this one over if you don't have the time. Played the game to death and article looks like a great read. CR4ZE (t • c) 14:17, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

It would definitely expedite the process. Cognissonance (talk) 18:44, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I am not reviewing, but I thought I'd post a few comments/questions:

• Development's last paragraph talks about voices, but it doesn't clarify the language. Presumably the reenactment of the battle in Poland would be helpful for Polish voices, but did they record knights in helmet speaking in English? Or any of the other 15 or so game languages?
• Which languages was the game localized in? I don't see a list
• I think the DRM-free sentence could be expanded into a paragraph, I remember reading several articles about how CPR approach to TW3 was seen as innovative, compared to unfriendly DRM-locks and such by some other companies. And it was not only because people complained about DRM, but also because the developers/company think DRM are consumer-unfriendly, and removing DRM would increase sales.
• I think there is some more or less valid criticism that should merit at least a sentence, ex. one of the refs [1] mentions discussion of sexism and minorities that were significant, and again I can see enough refs that this type of stuff should deserve at last a sentence.
• comparing pl article to this, I note it discusses 1) the intro/trailer by Tomasz Bagiński, our article does not mention him at all. 2) It also mentions that the writer Sapkowski helped a bit as a consultant for some names and map, but didn't have any other influence (ref). 3) it also mentions that the collector's edition, not even mentioned in our article, came with a figurine, medallion and an artbook. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:30, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
  • The fact that nobody is bothering to even reply to my comments does not bode well for this GA. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:13, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
    • The fact that the reviewer is not reviewing does not bode well for this GA. Cognissonance (talk) 19:21, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
      • Maybe they are waiting for someone to address the issues I raised. If the person(s) who submitted this GA don't bother replying to me, the reviewer may assume they won't bother to reply to their review, so why waste time? I thought about taking over this review, but again, why bother? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:31, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
        • This is not new behaviour. I take your comments as suggestions, and disagree that they would improve the article. Cognissonance (talk) 20:43, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
          • Would you care to discuss them in more detail rather then this generic dismissal? I spent substantial amount of time reading this, identifying problems and offering my suggestions as to what they are, almost as much as I would do if it was regular GA. Your dismissive stance is not making a good impression on me or anyone else who may want to review your work. Why should anyone offer review if you don't seem to be interested in even engaging in a discussion about proposed suggestions? If you don't want to implement them, fine, but I do not think this article is ready for a GA until they have been at the very least discussed properly. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:35, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
            • I have implmented some changes based on your suggestions above. Languages generally are WP:GAMECRUFT, and so is the part about the trailer and voices, which are sort of trivial details, so trivial that I can't really find sufficient source to substantiate them. The DRM thing you mentioned above is more about CD Projekt's philosophy rather than this specific game. AdrianGamer (talk) 13:14, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Comment As info, there's been some pretty extensive copy editing and changes the last couple of days, see this diff set. -- ferret (talk) 23:12, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

@Famous Hobo: Will you be doing the review or can CR4ZE take over? Cognissonance (talk) 11:32, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

— pinging @Famous Hobo: again. AdrianGamer (talk) 13:14, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 13:43, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   "The writing was infused with real-life aspects" - this is a bit vague in the lead, can you clarify at all?

   "some of which were later patched" - this needs a wikilink or explanation; non-gamers might not understand the terminology

   "(one steel and one silver)" - I'm not sure if this is worth mentioning, but up to you

   I went into more detail about their function. Cognissonance (talk) 10:18, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

   "(who pay in crowns)" - the lead says you earn "gold". Is 'crowns' the type of gold? I'm not sure if this bracketed information is worth mentioning in any case

   You're right, there's no need to go into all of the monetary units. Cognissonance (talk) 10:18, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

   "Gies from Polygon" - have I missed something? Why are we only using his surname?

   'people of color' could be wikilinked to Person of color

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: As I completed the peer review I'm already fairly familiar with this article. Very close to passing once minor issues are addressed. Freikorp (talk) 01:41, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

   @Freikorp:  Done Cognissonance (talk) 10:29, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

   Passing. Well done. :) Freikorp (talk) 11:18, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

   Thanks Freikorp for taking the review. Thank you Darkwarriorblake (plot, setting) and AdrianGamer (gameplay, post-release) for helping me with the article in June. It's a good article now because of you. Cognissonance (talk) 12:36, 5 December 2017 (UTC)