Official images for The Witcher's Netflix series have arrived

Official images look heavily Photoshopped or they must be low resolution/pixelated. They don't look real to me. Just look at Geralts face.

He should have his second sword on his back. He ALWAYS has 2. I know it's not entirely comfortable and probably gets in the way but they've got a few million dollars they can figure it out..
 
Even the medallion is all wrong.

Can't believe I missed that.

This show honestly has just lost all hype from me. I was the happiest person in the world when they announced it. But basically everything after that has killed it. Starting with the SJW stuff at the beginning, geralt actor choice, and now they can't even get the medallion right...
 
Even the medallion is all wrong.

Yeah. Why has it been Game of Thronesified? You would think they would make something like this. (Image from the cover of the first book)

220px-Andrzej_Sapkowski_-_The_Last_Wish.jpg
 
Even the medallion is all wrong.

Been looking online for book quotes (seeing as this is based on the books and not the game) and came across this one which could explain the design choice

The stranger reached into his jerkin once more and pulled out a round medallion on a silver chain. It pictured the head of a wolf, baring its fangs.

Although I have seen other descriptions where it's in the shape of a wolf head, but it does seem like Geralt has owned several different medallions.
 
The image above showcases Geralt with a single sword on his back, complete with a scabbard which enables the sword to be drawn from that position, a feature which standard scabbards do not support.

Didn’t know a standard holster couldn’t do this, but you needed a special one for it.
 
Been looking online for book quotes (seeing as this is based on the books and not the game) and came across this one which could explain the design choice



Although I have seen other descriptions where it's in the shape of a wolf head, but it does seem like Geralt has owned several different medallions.

Yes while this is true the official book covers that have them as seen above in WYP post is much more like what people think of a Witcher medallion. It's an incredibly important part of the Witcher life and toolset. A plain flat coin with little detail is just so meh. My biggest gripe is the effort just screams what's the cheapest thing we can do
 
wait for it to come out before getting on the "OMG they got this detail wrong, literally unwatchable" train.

If the show is good and manages to do the source material justice, great. If not then grab your pitchforks.
 
wait for it to come out before getting on the "OMG they got this detail wrong, literally unwatchable" train.

If the show is good and manages to do the source material justice, great. If not then grab your pitchforks.

It's not hopping on a train if they consistently derail it and ruin the show.

You also contradict yourself. "this got this detail wrong" then go on to say "if they manage to get the source material justice great"

NOT getting this easy tiny detail ISN'T giving the source material justice.

This is also not the first thing they screwed up either. Every time news comes out they release it's just another thing that ruins the show.

Everyone was excited for the show. It was the easiest thing in the world to do. Literally every gamer was going to watch it. ALL they had to do was make a simple story and nail Geralt's actor. That's it. They managed to ruin the latter and then if they can't even get the details of a simple medallion right it doesn't inspire confidence into the story.
 
It's not hopping on a train if they consistently derail it and ruin the show.

You also contradict yourself. "this got this detail wrong" then go on to say "if they manage to get the source material justice great"

NOT getting this easy tiny detail ISN'T giving the source material justice.

This is also not the first thing they screwed up either. Every time news comes out they release it's just another thing that ruins the show.

Everyone was excited for the show. It was the easiest thing in the world to do. Literally every gamer was going to watch it. ALL they had to do was make a simple story and nail Geralt's actor. That's it. They managed to ruin the latter and then if they can't even get the details of a simple medallion right it doesn't inspire confidence into the story.
.

I argue that focusing on small details as a measure of the success of an adaptation is what would seperate a brilliant piece of work from an acceptable one. To focus on such small details before the story or character building has been demonstrated is premature.

It is not a contradiction but a matter of where the line of what is acceptable and what is not is drawn, which is subjective. A piece of work doesn’t need to be completely faithful to all the details of its source material in order to be good.
 
That is all true however as I already said it's just one thing after another with this. Everytime they release information it's always something. He's not even carrying two swords. I mean like c'mon that's an iconic sign of a Witcher.
 
Where is his silver sword? The witcher carrys two swords silver for beast's and iron for humans, if thay cant even get that, then i dont have much hope for this tv show. :huh:
 
Where is his silver sword? The witcher carrys two swords silver for beast's and iron for humans, if thay cant even get that, then i dont have much hope for this tv show. :huh:

I could be wrong here, but I was told that in the books that the steel sword is on Geralt's back and that the silver sword typically stays on Roach.

Most monsters can be handled with Steel in the series, so why carry the silver one at all times? The games changed that by making steel for people and silver for all monsters. For gameplay reasons it also makes sense to carry both at all times.
 
I could be wrong here, but I was told that in the books that the steel sword is on Geralt's back and that the silver sword typically stays on Roach.

Most monsters can be handled with Steel in the series, so why carry the silver one at all times? The games changed that by making steel for people and silver for all monsters. For gameplay reasons it also makes sense to carry both at all times.

The books imply both are true because they aren't consistent. He also faces less monsters in the books which is why he usually has it on roach. But...

It's also difficult to tell. Half of the books feature Geralt without any gear. Just a basic crappy sword because he lost it all. But before that he did indeed carry two swords. There are multiple instances of both having two and not having two. It seems to me it's whatever the plot desires.

Though in Season of Storms in the beginning of the book he is carrying two swords and some Guardsman notice him and instantly recognize a person with 2 swords as a Witcher.

But as I said it's not consistent.
 
Last edited:
The books imply both are true because they aren't consistent. He also faces less monsters in the books which is why he usually has it on roach. But...

It's also difficult to tell. Half of the books feature Geralt without any gear. Just a basic crappy sword because he lost it all. But before that he did indeed carry two swords. There are multiple instances of both having two and not having two. It seems to me it's whatever the plot desires.

Though in Season of Storms in the beginning of the book he is carrying to swords and some Guardsman notice him and instantly recognize a person with 2 swords as a Witcher.

But as I said it's not consistent.

Fair enough. Thanks for the clarification.
 
I wonder if the fact that we haven't seen a second sword yet or the medallion being different are mistakes/poor decisions or if they are carefully planned well thought out ones?

I guess we won't know until it comes out :P
 
Back
Top