Good articleThe Witcher 3: Wild Hunt has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 24, 2017Peer reviewReviewed
December 5, 2017Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 10, 2018.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the video game The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt was marketed as "Skyrim in a Game of Thrones sauce"?
Current status: Good article

The Most Awarded game of all time thing[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

"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)[reply]
At the time? But he is now. Federal Chancellor (NightShadow) (talk) 15:47, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And tomorrow might not be. The statement is accurate and future proof. -- ferret (talk) 15:50, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why delete GameRankings reviews?[edit]

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

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]
@Famous Hobo: Try getting to the review within the month. I'm moving in November. Cognissonance (talk) 17:16, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@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)[reply]
It would definitely expedite the process. Cognissonance (talk) 18:44, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

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

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

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
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)[reply]


  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)[reply]
    "(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)[reply]
    "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)[reply]
    @Freikorp:  Done Cognissonance (talk) 10:29, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Passing. Well done. :) Freikorp (talk) 11:18, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    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)[reply]

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

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

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

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

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

Greatest of all time?[edit]

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)[reply]

"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)[reply]

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for deletion[edit]

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

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

Merge accolades list[edit]

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)[reply]

Reviews[edit]

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

References

  1. ^ https://rpggeek.com/rpgissuearticle/175365/witcher-3

Screenshot[edit]

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)[reply]

New screenshot[edit]

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)[reply]

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

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

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

Possible Endings[edit]

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)[reply]

Categories