Reddit Reddit reviews A Game of Thrones (A Song of Ice and Fire, Book 1)

We found 16 Reddit comments about A Game of Thrones (A Song of Ice and Fire, Book 1). Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Literature & Fiction
Books
TV, Movie & Game Tie-In Fiction
Genre Literature & Fiction
A Game of Thrones (A Song of Ice and Fire, Book 1)
Paper back
Check price on Amazon

16 Reddit comments about A Game of Thrones (A Song of Ice and Fire, Book 1):

u/stackednerd · 4 pointsr/suggestmeabook

Fellow fan of series here! Let me see...

Young Adult
Percy Jackson series is fun (and finished, too, I think).
Artemis Fowl series isn't quite as good as Percy Jackson IMHO, but it's got a following.

Fantasy
Harry Dresden series This is one of my favorites. Harry is Chicago's only professional wizard. There are a ton of these books and they are still going strong.
Game of Thrones These are great...but unfinished. If you watch the show, reading the books does help you get even more out of the story, I think.
Wheel of Time Another good series. There is a LOT of this series and it's finished. (Thank you, Brandon Sanderson!)
Mistborn Speaking of Brandon Sanderson... This one is very good. I highly recommend reading the Mistborn books before trying the Stormlight Archive, but only because as good as Mistborn is, Stormlight Archive is even better.
Stormlight Archive Amazing. Man, these are good. The series isn't finished, but the two books that are available are some of my favorites ever.
Kingkiller Chronicles I loved the first book. I could not freakin' believe I enjoyed the second one even more. The third one is still pending.
Temeraire Dragons in Napoleonic times. Super cool premise! This one is not finished (I don't think, anyway).
Gentlemen Bastards Con men in a fantasy realm. It's pretty light on the fantasy elements. Very light, I'd say. I'd also say that it has some of the very best swearing that I've ever come across. :D

Scifi
Old Man's War I'm almost finished this one--it's amazing!

Horror/Thriller
Passage Trilogy I've heard these described as vampire books...maybe zombie books... It's apocalyptic for sure. Great books!

Mysteries
Amelia Peabody Egyptology + murder mysteries. Super fun, but trust me...go with the audiobooks for these. They are best when they are performed.
Stephanie Plum Total popcorn reads. If that's your thing, shut off your brain and just enjoy.
Walt Longmire These get particularly good as it goes along. The main character is a sheriff in modern day Wyoming. (Side note: The TV show is also great--just don't expect them to stick to the books.)

Graphic Novels (Everything recommended can be gotten in a "book" format instead of only in comic form, in case that matters. I've gotten most of these from my local library.)
Locke & Key Eerie as crap. Love the art! This one is on-going.
Y: The Last Man All the men on the planet drop dead in a day...except for Yorrick. REALLY good. This is the series that got me reading graphic novels. Plus, it's finished!
Walking Dead I am not a zombie fan...but I like these. They're not done, but I've read up through volume 22 and am still enjoying them.

Other
OutlanderI have no idea how to categorize these or even give a description that does them justice. I refused to pick it up for AGES because it sounded like a bodice-ripper romance and that's not my bag. But these are good!

I hope there's something in there that'll do for you. Have fun and read on!

Edit: Apparently, I need to practice formatting. :/
Edit 2: I forgot to add the Lies of Locke Lamora (Gentlemen Bastards #1).

u/sphRam · 3 pointsr/gameofthrones

The series as a whole is called A Song of Ice and Fire. Here are the books in order:
A Game of Thrones

A Clash of Kings

A Storm of Swords

A Feast for Crows

A Dance with Dragons

They also exist in audiobook format, narrated by Roy Dotrice, which I can recommend.

u/FuzzyPuffin · 2 pointsr/witcher
u/Hahahaharley · 2 pointsr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

My cheapest is this book for $6.74.

My most expensive is this bed which s $200. I don't actually own a bed yet...

u/The_Doctor07 · 1 pointr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

Sometimes everyone needs a hug.

internet hug

For me it is all the amazing adventures that I plan on having and the knowledge that to get there I have to go through this. Some days it works better than others.

Hope you feel better!

And for the contest a used version please!

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0553593714/ref=tmm_mmp_used_olp_sr?ie=UTF8&condition=used&sr=&qid=

u/l337chica · 1 pointr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

I have never read them [so I would need the first one] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0553593714/ref=aw_wl_ov_dp__1?colid=1ACYBPXW50GS&coliid=I21V5YU4WPVZXX) and your kids are amazing:)

u/FancyPancakes · 1 pointr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

I'VE BEEN GOOD I SWEAR AND I WOULD LOVE THIS BOOK USED.

You rock :)

u/OrysBaratheon · 1 pointr/gameofthrones

Paperback is only $6.74

u/Bhraal · 1 pointr/PS4

> it is only proving the point that he, as an writer, doesn't care for sales number.

>He SHOULD be worried more than anyone if someone doesn't buy his books because they will think it is a game adaptation.

Either sales matter or they don't. Make up your mind.

-----------------------------------------------------

> If sales number matters in a discussion about popularity and not flat fee profitability, it is because this discussion is ours, not Sapkowski's.

You started this discussion by quoting sales figures in response to my post regarding the games' popularity in relation to the books.

-----------------------------------------------------

> But I'm discussing about what Sapkowski thinks, and not about what you or me think.

No, you're discussing what you think he thinks.

-----------------------------------------------------

> I was not happy at book fairs or conventions, when the fans took my books in my hand, looked at the covers and scornfully put them away. Game related. Games are not interested in us, we will rather have something original, new Abercrombie, Aaronovitch or Tregillis.

What is he describing here? Do they actively go up to him and say out loud to him that they are not interested in his books because they think they are game related, or is he simply attributing their disinterest to that idea?

-----------------------------------------------------

> He is talking about the games covers on his books, and not the games themselves nor CDPR;

In that interview. In the one I linked and many others he is talking about the games. From the article:

"I have nothing against the game itself. I think it's a high-level product. All the benefits CDPR received for it are absolutely well-earned. I have nothing against video games in general. I have nothing against the people who play them, even if I don't and never will," Sapkowski says. "The whole animosity started when the game began to spoil my market."

That's him saying the games have started spoiling his market. Not the game art on the cover or the publishers, the games. Yes, he has nothing against the games as products, but he seems to focus more on the negatives their success brings him more than the positives.

-----------------------------------------------------

> He EXPLICITLY took off all the blame from CDPR in that regard in other interviews, making sure it is foreign publisher's fault.

Yet, he says this in this interview that was published last month:

"How are some of them supposed to know—especially in Germany, Spain or the US—that my books are not game related? That I'm not writing books based on games? They may not know that, and CDPR bravely conceals the game's origins. It's written in fine print, you need a microscope to see it, that the game is 'based on' [my books].""

-----------------------------------------------------

> If he is talking about "losing readers", he is clearly referring, by definition, to people who HAVE NOT bought his books. Of course that if someone bought his books even with that games covers, then this comment does not extent to them.

And just what are you referring to here? What do you think I wrote that would warrant this clarification?

-----------------------------------------------------

> But do you think that these game covers will help the books sell for those who have not played the games or aren't gamers themselves? The non-gaming public, which is a far larger target audience, never takes seriously what they consider to be a game adaptation.

This is where you lose me. Yes, the American covers for the Witcher series published by Orbit look like shit, and they do use assets from the games. I disagree about them "looking like adaptations". There are other books that use 3D models on their cover, without it being based on anything else. If you don't know the games well enough to recognize the character models, you're probably not going to make the connection that it is related to a game until you read the back where it says the books inspired the games, and not the other way around.

The covers aren't bad because they use assets from the game. They are bad because they are bad covers. You know what other covers are bad?

http://www.fantasyshop.cz/gfx/upload/fs_ob_200742311542.jpg
https://www.amazon.de/s/ref=nb_sb_noss/279-6489234-9877263?__mk_de_DE=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Sapkowski
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/19/ac/92/19ac92959047dc057381d622be9730df.jpg
http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/witcher/images/6/61/Blood_of_Elves_UK.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20110601235454

That last one can't seriously be an actual cover, can it?

Everybody knows the idiom "don't judge a book by its cover" and anyone who's serious about reading abides by that. We've all seen books we know are good with terrible covers, and we've all bought books that looked good on the surfaces that turned out to be shit. Have you been in a fantasy section of a bookstore recently? If you can't look past tacky cover art chances are you aren't that heavily invested in the genre.

-----------------------------------------------------

> Tell me, what do you think is a larger public: those who played the games or the average fantasy reader like the ones from LotR, ASOIAF, Harry Potter, Narnia etc. etc?

How modest of you to bring up the absolute biggest fantasy books series as if the Witcher books were destined to be among them, or if interest in those books would translate into interest for the Witcher series if the covers were just differnt.

LotR and the Hobbit popularized the fantasy genre and has as such become somewhat of a definition of . If you have any interest in the genre you are probably going to read it.
Here it is being sold with assets from the movies on the cover.

ASOIAF had sold 60 million copies over 5 books and 3 novellas in 2015 (latest numbers available), while the Witcher game series has sold 25 million copies over 3 titles.
Here it is being sold with assets from the HBO series on the cover.

Harry Potter and Narina are children's books that are well written enough to be enjoyable by those who are older, so naturally they have a much wider demographic that the Witcher series could ever reach without changing it at its core.

Books like that don't become huge hits because of their covers or impulse purchases, but by word of mouth. If a friend recommends a book to you and you see it has a bad cover, will you not read it? If you like it would you not recommend it to your other friends, telling them to ignore the bad cover art?

-----------------------------------------------------

> I mean, why do you think he should not worry about his reputation as a serious and authentic fantasy writer, instead of someone who seems to only write games novelizations?

Because as I wrote earlier I think people who don't play the games probably won't make that connection, and in any case anyone qualified to pass that judgement wouldn't be making that mistake. Confused gaming fanboys are not any authority of literature. There are people out there that don't know that the movie Titanic is based on a real event. As any audience grows the amount of idiots within it will also grow.

If someone is looking for serious and authentic fantasy, they look for it by doing research and fishing for recommendations among friends or online, not picking up books at based on cover art because that's just a shot in the dark. A book cover is just an ad, and anyone looking for quality products know to look past the ads and check out the reviews for any quality issues.

-----------------------------------------------------

> That other quote about walking through the woods and talking to a squirrel means the same thing that when he says that no adaptation can match the original in terms of storytelling. He is not detracting any medium, he is just stating a well known fact.

That's not a fact, that's an opinion. You can't do it exactly the same, but that doesn't mean you can't do it just as good or better (not saying whether or not the games did do it better in the case of the Witcher). As an example, many of the works of Shakespeare are old folk tales and stories modernized (for the day) and adapted for the stage. Now they are held up as classics because of how he was able to present those stories.

-----------------------------------------------------

> Ask it to any book reader, especially to ASOIAF or LotR readers. Likewise, there's no way for a movie or a game to nail the omniscient description of a character's feelings, thoughts or any other circumstance with the same depth that a written word can. Everyone knows it, what is wrong about that?

Again, opinions. By people who identify as readers about their favorite medium. Pictures, movements, sounds, dynamic interactivity, etc can express and reveal things that would be to impossible or trite to put into text. Just because you and a lot of other people might favor depiction in written form does not mean it is an absolute fact.

u/zachary_bell · 1 pointr/writing

It has a great title.

The rest might need some work. I don't think it's bad, it's just rough. Go back through, make every word earn its place. Cut any that don't need to be there.

If you're going to open on a dialog, commit to that. See open for A Clash Of Kings. Don't stuff exposition between the spoken lines. At every opportunity, turn that exposition into dialog.

On the subject of GRRM--it's fine to be inspired by his work, but think hard on what you can bring in addition.

u/jljentlie · 1 pointr/Random_Acts_Of_Amazon

I am OBSESSED---> Game of Thrones, I admit I hopped on the bandwagon a little later than most but I absolutely love this series.

u/BoilerMaker11 · 0 pointsr/Games

> "Hey, Harry Potter/A Game of Thrones/Northern Lights/American Psycho were written 20+ years ago! I shouldn't have to pay 11.99 for copies! They should be 3.99 at most they're so old! Only new stuff should be expensive!"

Ummm....yes, actually. Would you pay $10,000 for a 1992 Ford Taurus, even if it still "runs well"? Would you pay $25 a The Dark Knight Blu-ray, even though it was one of the best movies of the 2000s and, arguably, the best movie of 2008? Would you pay $40 for A Link to the Past, a game considered the greatest of all time? No, you wouldn't. Despite those items still holding up and being great, you would not pay that expensive price for them, precisely because they were old.

There's such a thing as depreciation, and the market determines that (go to any used game store and CoD4 will be $5-7, whereas a black label copy of, say, Marvel vs Capcom 2 will be like $50, due to rarity). They're keeping the price artificially high to make it seem like a "premium" product that's still "in demand". If that were truly the case and people were still gobbling this game up (I'm not saying the community isn't still there, I'm talking about new consumers. That's what 'demand' addresses), they would continuously be bragging about the sales and that would justify its price point. You wanna know why GTAV is still $60? Because millions of people are still buying the game, to this day, and some milestone achievement is announced every 6 months or so. That obviously isn't true for CoD4, despite how good the game is.

Oh, and btw, I really don't know what point you were trying to make mentioning any of those books, considering:

Harry Potter

A Game of Thrones

Northern Lights

American Psycho (This one appears to hold up, but apparently it's a rare book)

I intentionally sorted by new, because if I picked used, the price would literally be a penny for 3 of those books, and $0.74 for the last.






u/badphish94 · -7 pointsr/television

I don't read enough books to know where to look for reviews, but I'll do my best. I got like 200 pages into ADWD before no longer caring, whereas with the first 3 I finished them all in days. It's like he looked at the last books and thought "hmm, people like seeing bad things happen to the characters. I'll just keep throwing bad things at them over and over again and they'll be so shocked they love it!"

AGOT - 4.5 stars. Top reviews are all of praise.

ACOK - 4.5 stars. Most of the top reviews are praise, some notice a dip in quality. I agree, though still a great book.

ASOS - 4.6 stars. Top reviews are praising it, much deserved.

AFFC - 3.8 stars. Top reviews say "it's okay, but..."

ADWD - 4.0 stars. Top reviews are even worse, despite the higher score.

Good books? Maybe, but they're not on the quality level of the Harry Potter books and the first 3 asoiaf books, which was what most people were expecting again.