The stats can't have been good for WOT. I know the drop off from episode 1 was terrible, some waited to the end of season 1 to call it. Book to movie adaptations usually go well if the work is simple or initially not good writing to begin with.

Other moments of good adaptation s are when they lean into the conventions of the new medium like walking dead or hellraiser.

The half hearted yanking names, locations, and a little lore and calling it good are less likely to be successful. WOT I would give a solid D in adaptation. That said the Harry Potter movies were commercially very successful but as actual adaptations they would get a C+ at best. Most characters are barely recognizable, most plot points have been cut, simplified, or changed. GOT has had the same issue, but again successful commercially speaking.

Comparing king [who rarely writes his own first draft] to Jordan isn't fair nor logical. The sheer length and detail of one wheel of time book could fit multiple kings books within it.

Keep in mind Sanderson isn't a co-writer. He was a fan who completed the series using Jordan's notes, and discussions with the writer. He was also actively mimicking Jordan's style [he did a decent job to be sure but co-writer doesn't cover his position]

The trouble with adaptations especially heavily d ones is that Amazon knew from episode one what their line was.

The drop-off of viewership was steady and brutal since they didn't really adapt the books at all. A few changes sure, but there was little in common from the books to the show.

As a fan of both IPs both series are at great risk. Ring of Power's main strengths are less content, more money, established previous epic movies, and far more competent writers.

Adaptation is one of the most difficult tasks a writer can attempt. WoT acting as an entry point for new fans; however, as an adaptation it failed on nearly all counts, plot, character, goals, motivations, and the social world they were attempting to reconstruct weren't consistent to the source material.

This does not mean they didn't make a good product, but when you fail to appeal to your attended audience such is deeply problematic. WoT fell into the same trap of many other modern IPs with star wars sequel trilogies being the most public of the latest bad adaptations. The main difference being that WoT had a logical story and character progression.

In contrast, rings of power is adapting the sumerilian which has set moments but far less firm plot. Lore wise I have been pleased with their work. Their characterization of key elf main characters has been less impressive. Their main antagonist has been their saving grace and good acting.

Word of mouth matters, I have pocketed many of the free games on xbox. Yet I only push a few games to other players. Origins is one that I continue to recommend.

Game can help, but allowing players to sort and connect games would be better. A fan of darksiders might like Veilguard, but connecting it to an existing IP terrible decision.

Now would i recommend Veilguard not a chance. It is in my top 5 worst experiences as a player. The monotonous combat being the worst offender. 100+ hours with no changes...

Following source material helps. The trouble with plot changes are the impacts on the future plotlines. Little sis now has none of her defining characteristics that lead to her fame, worship, insanity, and then death. Which is the entire plot of children of dune and rather vital for prophet. No idea how director plans to fix it.

Unfortunately, that's only one character that he's changed... there are multiple which is going to make the third movie highly different than the book.

I like the original dune and the sci-Fi miniseries (the most accurate to source material) more interesting film choices in the first adaptation.