Witcher Creator: I Don't Have Anything Against Games; I Was Stupid To Sell All The Rights to CDPR

The Witcher creator Andrzej Sapkowski clarified that he doesn't actually hate games.

He also blamed himself for not believing in CDPR at first, which resulted in him requesting a fixed sum instead of a share of the profits made by the games.

Read Full Story >>
KaiPow2383d ago

I'm glad he's such a good sport with the purchase deal. Lesser writers could've just taken the money and been done with the universe they created.

Festano2383d ago

Well, he's biting his hands for taking the deal but at least he can leverage the increased popularity to sell more books, so it makes sense that he wants to write new ones

MVGeneral2382d ago (Edited 2382d ago )

The only reason the witcher got popular was because of cdpr. They made a helluva franchise. Now he's having regrets, because it gained huge success and a following. but he wouldn't have had this much exposure or recognition if it wasn't for the takented people at cdpr, so he shouldnt bite the hand that fed him.

Same thing with George Lucas. After selling star wars to disney and the force awakens gaining worldwide success (2.5 billion box office) he regretted it in an interview and was sulking.
And like the game of thrones series, George rr Martin's books (a song of ice and fire) wouldn't have had worldwide success and recognition without hbo's show that put him on the map. But unlike him, George fully embraced hbo's show.

2382d ago
game4funz2381d ago


Worldwide popularity yes but not Poland popularity as it is a Polish series and was already popular. Hence the games.

kitsune4512381d ago


He isn't regretting selling the rights, he's regretting not taking a percentage deal that they offered instead of taking the one-time lump sum. He didn't expect the game to be so successful and congratulates them for it. Everyone is being nice and polite, nothing to see here.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2381d ago
joab7772382d ago (Edited 2382d ago )

Hindsight is always 20/20. At the time, he probably thought that The Witcher would be made, and it was. So, he made a good deal of money. What he couldn't foresee was the evolution to TW3 and the gloval success of CDPR. Now he wished he had struck a different deal.

Though at the time they offered x amount of the profit, but it wasn't smart to take it because odds are it wouldn't have become one of the greatest games ever made.

Shoulda reserved the right to at least write more books.

darksky2381d ago

If he can't write more books and CDPR have moved on from any more Witcher games then that's bad. Would have been nice for there to be more Witcher games or books.

2381d ago
generic-user-name2381d ago

Maybe he comes across as a good sport now, but it wasn't long ago he sounded extremely bitter about the games.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2381d ago
Cybermario2383d ago

too bad, he probably thought this game wont be too big of a hit or the amazing franchise it is today.

Alexious2382d ago

I guess he didn't know anything about games and how big they can be in terms of revenue.

2381d ago
ccgr2382d ago

I'm sure his books got read read more from the games

RememberThe3572382d ago

And the games IMO are far better than the books.

Alexious2382d ago

So you don't recommend them? I was thinking of getting them. I need my Geralt fix

Movefasta19932382d ago (Edited 2382d ago )

Yes Alex buy them I currently reading the final book, they go over almost everything,how geralt and ciri first met to how he got titled as Geralt of Rivia, they are all amazing(except the first).Everyone I know who have read the books believe the story telling to be way better than the games. The tower of swallow,the second last book,it's story is way better ,and I mean way better than anything in the games.There's this man named Bonhart,he's slain witchers in the past,just reading through the events of him and ciri is worth it alone.Ahh man read them,btw I read the books after the games and I still think the majority of them far surpasses the books when it comes to story telling.
AND Just to let you know,the last wish is the first book,but imo it's nothing special, but i recommend you READ the last wish first and you'll most likely continue reading on from there.

dreamoner2382d ago

@Movefasta1993 Letho's design certainly took inspirations from Bonhart.

RememberThe3572382d ago

I've read the first three and don't really see a reason to keep reading them. The books are okay and serve to give you more back story into the characters in the games but as stand alone books they're just okay. The games on the other hand are standard setting.

starchild2382d ago

Hmm I love the books and the game. They strengthen and complement each other.

game4funz2381d ago

The books are amazing.
Go buy them. They're good.

Diffraction_Fos2381d ago

@Alexious - Read them. I read all 7 and they're generally good reads. The first couple of books definitely are great. The series dragged a bit during the 4th, 5th and 6th books, IMO. But overall its a very good series.

morganfell2381d ago

I recommend them all, including the first book. There is essential information in that book that actually applies to all 3 games. Sometimes it is in prominent ways and sometimes subtle, like the choice of names Geralt has in TW3 when he enters the Knight's Tourney.

The other thing about the books is their writing style is different from other western authors. Sapkowski grew up in cold war Eastern Europe and his perspectives are just different enough, his writing altered from others that the difference is noticeable and refreshing. This sleight difference makes it through the translation to English. One thing about the books that transferred into the games is the fact that in life there are often no right decisions merely our choices and the consequences we enjoy or suffer.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2381d ago
Chris_Wray2382d ago

Would be nice if CD Projekt did something with him, to benefit him further, now that the series has been a runaway success. Possibly get him to pen for a future new IP?

Diffraction_Fos2381d ago

Doubt it. He didn't like the way they "progressed" from the end of his books. So he probably won't be too eager to accept them as canon to his world.

Chris_Wray2379d ago

Possibly not to work on Witcher but actually work on a brand new IP more than anything else.

GamePeace2382d ago (Edited 2382d ago )

For all putting the games above the books ... without the books the games wouldn't even exist and CPR wouldn't even been that famous (without leaning on the universe, characters and the stories of Andrzej Sapkowski).

zuul90182382d ago (Edited 2382d ago )

And without trees paper wouldnt exist so he couldnt have wrote on anything.
If ashton kutcher didnt make the movie butterfly effect you and i wouldnt have our account names. You might be Gamewar and i might be Zuul9019.

Whos to say cdpr wouldnt have made their own fantasy universe and it wouldve been successful? It doesnt matter if ones responsible for the others existence, they can still say its better than the original or vica versa.

GamePeace2381d ago (Edited 2381d ago )

No, I don't need Ashton Kutcher for chosing my account-names and you can talk like that, because they already have the success (thanks to Sapkowski too), you're just painting fantasy scenarios ("wouldn't have ... "), while the truth is that their games are heavily based on Sapkowski's work. You can't say that one is better than the other, you can only state your personal opinion by saying that you find the books better or the games, but that's only a subjective point of view and not a fact. Truth remains that they can partially thank Sapwoski for their success ... everything else would be just madness and sheer arrogance. If it would be for many of you, Sapkowski should thank CPR for making his books famous and that's partially true, but without Sapkowski Geralt wouldn't even exist, no Sapkowski, no Witcher games ... get me?

zuul90182381d ago (Edited 2381d ago )

Sir i feel like you think theres some weird argument that im not part of...
I dont care who has to thank who? (Should be mutual right? He made it, they helped bring popularity) i havent read the books and dont plan on it. Theyre probably good, so great? I just felt your argument was flawed so i responded to it.
How is my fantasy scenario different from yours, "cdpr wouldnt have been that famous" how do you know this? Would they have not made games? Your doing same thing in your argument sir.
As for saying which is better you absolutely can.... as you said, "by saying that you find the books better or the game" yea so.... they can say they like one better than the other then? Like they can with any thing that exists? Dogs are better than cats? Can i not say that? Do i have to state afterwards its my opinion for it to be passable, or should i be able to have the hope that the people reading this can understand that statements like that are opinions not facts.

GamePeace2381d ago (Edited 2381d ago )

To respond to your second comment, because I can't reply under it. Of course you can say whatever you please, but fact is, that the Witcher games exist because of Sapkowski's work, you don't need to read his books, but show at least a little bit of respect for this person (I feel that many on the comment section lack the respect for him, saying that CPR made his books popular and that the games are by far the better Witcher prodcuts, while they forget that Sapkowski is the real mind behind the universe, nearly every character and story of the Witcher). You can say that dogs are better than cats, but that's only your personal opinion and not the truth. Better would be if you would say:"In my opinion dogs are better than cats" (sounds much more respectful and humble in my opinion), instead of of blatantly saying: "dogs are better than cats" (that sounds really childlike, pretentious and boisterous, like you want to impose your statement on someone elses mind), you should express yourself more clearly next time, because not everyone is willing to take your arguments seriously if you just state something without making clear that's only your personal point of view. That's why phrases like 'in my opinion', 'I'm off the opinion', 'To my mind' ecc. exist, right?

zuul90182381d ago

I guess yea, thats why phrases like that exist. However at 27 and having been in the navy so ive traveled, im gonna say nobody really talks like that. Its not disrespectful to cats if i say dogs are better than cats. Same if i say the games better than the book.
I seriously highly doubt you put "in my opinion" or "im of the opinion" before every one of your opinions. I mean only a crazy person would do that. Yes occassionally youll use them but can you honestly say you use them all the time? I think ive used something to state an opinion is an opinion on about 10% of my opinions. Because if the person needs me to state what type of comment i make before i make it talking is going to become a massive chore.
I think childlike would be "dogs are better than cats and cat people are idiots" or heres a great one "ps4 is better than xbox unless youre an xbot". Or if they dont allow for the opposition to have an argument. "Dogs are better than cats end of story". But to say not claiming an opinion is an opinion beforehand is childlike is absurd.

Your skin is a bit too thin if simple opinions feel pretentious and