Talk:The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

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)

Still no user reviews of metacricts with 10k+ ratings eligible?

Why? Is metacricts not trust worthy dkm (talk) 05:31, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

• User reviews and other self-published sources are unreliable and not mentioned in Wikipedia articles (unless called to attention in a secondary source, wherein the secondary source would be cited). per WP:VG/USERREVIEW --The1337gamer (talk) 10:00, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• The Witcher 3 - Standard Edition Unboxing (Official Trailer).webm

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:36, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Greatest of all time?

If this game is "considered to be one of the greatest games of all time" or even the badly worded "considered one of the greatest role-playing games" it needs to have sources and statements in the article proper backing it up.

If it's really as great as it's made out to be, it should be easy enough to find them. I haven't look myself because I've never played this game, nor have any great opinion on it. I only have an opinion on unsupported claims in the lede of articles. Chaheel Riens (talk) 20:28, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

• WP:CITELEAD says that citations are not required in the lead, so check the respective reception section for the sources. It also has 10 citations on the very wikilink you added the CN tag on that could be used in this article as well. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:33, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

"The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt has been considered one of the best role-playing games of all time". Three citations. Reception section. Cognissonance (talk) 20:47, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion:

• The Witcher 3 - World Setting (Gamescom Dev Diary).webm
• The Witcher 3 - “Downwarren” (Gameplay Teaser).webm

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:42, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Merge accolades list

Per recent discussions ([2] [3] [4]) on standalone accolades lists, I think List of accolades received by The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt should be merged back into this article. The table is far too short to warrant a separate article per WP:SPLIT. The relevant guideline is at WP:VG/AWARDS. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:58, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

• Support. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 20:00, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Reviews

• Casus Belli (v4, Issue 15 - Jun/Jul 2015)

BOZ (talk) 02:53, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

References

Screenshot

That's not a screenshot, that's a promo shot; it was included in Official Fan Kit. There should be an interface, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HeadsOff (talk • contribs) 05:40, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

New screenshot

is this File:Witcher3Detail.png allowed? The game is not open sourced, so why should screenshot be cc-by-sa? Artem.G (talk) 10:10, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Witcher3Detail.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Possible Endings

I read this in the article.

"The game's story has three possible endings, determined by the player's choices at key points in the narrative."

Yet here I read that there are 36 possible endings and other sources give different amounts.

https://www.ign.com/wikis/the-witcher-3-wild-hunt/Endings

Granted, it says there aren't 36 different endings cutscenes, but maybe it could be explained better what is meant by an ending. Nathematical (talk) 22:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)