213
this post was submitted on 13 May 2025
213 points (98.6% liked)
Asklemmy
48022 readers
919 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Man in the High Castle tv show. The premise was interesting, Nazis taking over the US and the population figting back. However, the show quickly devolved into a confusing mess.
Nazis are in charge of the US government, yet there's other Nazis on the run from the Nazis in charge? And they're hiding bibles? I was left scratching my head wondering if there were any characters that weren't Nazis. I guess it's a story about how bad guys always turn on each other?
Also The Witcher season 1 tv show. I've never played the games before and knew nothing about it. I was hoping the tv series would be my introduction to the games, but... what in the actual fuck. Was the director drunk? Is this a show about medieval fantasy time travel and I'm just not getting it?
Although I liked the series, the "supernatural" elements in it really threw me off. I would still recommend the series but be clear that it is science fiction and doesn't always adhere to physical limitations as we know them, without getting any more specific than that.
Unfortunately the case for a good portion of Philip K. Dick's work... Schizophrenia, amphetamines, and misogyny can do that I guess.
But when he was good... He was the best of his genre. Literally imo...
Season 1 is based on the first book, which was made some a bunch of serials in a fiction magazine. It's honestly pretty spot on with the book and the following books and seasons are fully linear.
The witcher Netflix series was a mess behind the scenes. I think some of the writers were taking it as opportunity to show off their 'abilities' and were writing OC instead of the witcher.
The three main perspectives it follows take place at different points in and over different amounts of time but each one is internally completely linear and then they all end the season at the same point as each other. Basically, the less you’re making an effort to follow the plot the easier it is to follow because keeping track of the interconnectedness distracts you from the straightforward character stories.
This isn’t me trying to convince you to go back, to be clear, I’m just hoping this will give you some closure.
As far as the witcher and time travel kind of. At some point in the future there was a disaster and Earth was destroyed. However some humans and lots of monsters from alternate realities ended up in the world of the Witcher. Elves and dwarves were the original inhabitants.
Humans used a mix of genetic engineering they had and magic taught to them by the elves to make the Witchers. The Witchers helped solve the massive monster problem and the world ended up with humans mostly on top.
Witchers age very slowly and if not killed can live a very long time. Powerful magic users are basically the same. So the stories from session 1 are spread over about 80 years with some long lived characters.
The first book that season 1 is primarily based on is also different from the other books. It's a bunch of short stories that are based on classic stories. So there is Sleeping Beauty, Snow White, Beauty and the Beast, etc.
I own the Witcher 3. Should I start there? Cause you just made me very interested.
Witcher 3 the game is a fine place to start. I'd say you can start in any of the games and Book 1 the Last Wish, Book 2 Sword of Destiny, or Book 3 Sword of Destiny. The games were in line with the books cannon but telling there own story. The popularity of the games made Sapkowski write more and they have now diverged somewhat. Here are some notes on all of them as far as a starting place.
Last Wish (book): Short stories based on classic stories. Good intro to the world and the writing style. No main plot so it can be skipped or read later without much problems. The Sleeping Beauty story is the opening cinematic of Game 1.
Sword of Destiny (Book): More short stories but we introduce a lot of the main characters in the rest of the books.
Blood of Elves (book): This is where the main story of the Witcher starts proper. After this you should read them in order.
Witcher 1 (game): Game play is ok but I think has the most interesting ideas and storytelling. It has the choose between two bad choices and find out later what the effect is. It doesn't spoon feed you the lore and there are lots of hints about what is going on you can catch if you are paying attention. For example echinops grow where terrible crimes were committed if the crime wasn't atoned for. Every place you find a echinops growing is a clue as to the nature of what happened there.
There is another great non obvious story element that I love. I think it's more fun to know this and see how it plays out in the game. I recommend reading the spoiler but it's up to you.
Main Villain
Alvin the boy who almost dies in the barghest attack in part 1 is also the main villain Jacques de Aldersberg. Towards the end of the game Alvin goes back in time and grows into the adult Jacques de Aldersberg. The various things you say to Alvin will change what Jacques says during the game. And when you kill Jacques at the end you use your silver blade. He looks so upset saying "That sword is for monsters."Witcher 2 Assassins of Kings (game): Improved gameplay with much more focus on combat and combat mechanics. Better graphics. Ok story but nothing compared to 1. The combat is very hard early and is required so that can be a drawback.
Witcher 3 Wild Hunt (game): The best game as far as gameplay. Fun lots different things to do and a solid story. It's a very Ciri focused story and thus can spoil some of the books somewhat. As far as a starting place you are going to have a lot of fun but it does throw a fair amount of characters at you and expect you to know them. Also the spoiler from 1 is specifically confirmed at one point so if you don't want that beware.
If you didn't actually finish high castle, it just keeps getting good weirder.
ahhh yeah Man in the High Castle, that's one where you oughta just read the book
i'm ditto w/u on how annoying constant time displacement is in television YES EVEN ANDOR DAMMIT
I felt like the story was amazing for season 1. Season 2 went downhill quickly because of the easy love triangle plot line. The main saving gave was the Rufus 'Obergruppenführer Smith' Sewell amd his son toryline. I couldn't even tell you if I've seen/remember one episode of season 3.
1st season had 2-3 timelines going at once, no time travel (this time) just poorly executed non-linear story telling