I have never owned Witcher 1, I do have Witcher 2 though and have tried multiple times to get into it but the controls/combat are just blegh. I've heard too many good things about 3 to ignore it any longer though but I don't wanna invest in it if I won't have a clue what's happening.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Do you have to play Witcher 1 & 2 to enjoy 3?
- Thread starter Machina
- Start date
EvilKatarn
Member
You should play them all anyway.
You won't have as much of an appreciation for some of the long running characters, but you can still definitely enjoy the game. I played Witcher 1 on PC, skipped 2, and played 3 for like 300+ hours. Fully enjoyed it. I would just read up on the main characters online so you are at least familiar with their relationship with Geralt.
Awesome game, btw. Prior to BotW was my game of the generation for sure. Now it sits at #2 but I'll definitely replay it again.
Awesome game, btw. Prior to BotW was my game of the generation for sure. Now it sits at #2 but I'll definitely replay it again.
E_Darkness
Member
It'll help your enjoyment. So would reading all the books. But if you really don't want to I'm sure you'll have a blast anyway.
D
Deleted member 245925
Unconfirmed Member
We had a similar thread two weeks ago: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1374387
Short answer: No, W3 is awesome on its own. Still, you get a lot more out of it by playing W1 and W2 and by reading the books.
Short answer: No, W3 is awesome on its own. Still, you get a lot more out of it by playing W1 and W2 and by reading the books.
Lunarwhale
Member
Nope - I didn't feel like I missed out on anything. I had started with The Witcher 2 and then bounced back to 1 thinking that I had missed some critical character information, but the games are just written in a manner where it throws you right into the lives of the characters and you piece it together from there.
I do think 1 and 2 are worth trying at some point, though personally 1 bored me fairly early on (plus weird sexism that got toned down a lot in 2 and far more in 3), and I never felt compelled to finish 2 despite enjoying it a fair bit more. Love 3 though.
I do think 1 and 2 are worth trying at some point, though personally 1 bored me fairly early on (plus weird sexism that got toned down a lot in 2 and far more in 3), and I never felt compelled to finish 2 despite enjoying it a fair bit more. Love 3 though.
texhnolyze
Banned
Not really. You'll understand Witcher 3 just fine with the summary from the start of the game.
However, you may get a better experience as a whole by playing the previous games, as you'll get to know the characters more and their relationship with Geralt. There's a reason why Geralt would do anything for his friends, and that's explained in the previous games. There's also his story with the ladies. The characters are one of the main reasons that make the Witcher series great to me.
However, you may get a better experience as a whole by playing the previous games, as you'll get to know the characters more and their relationship with Geralt. There's a reason why Geralt would do anything for his friends, and that's explained in the previous games. There's also his story with the ladies. The characters are one of the main reasons that make the Witcher series great to me.
Vincent Grayson
Member
Witcher 3 is such a huge improvement over the first two. I'd read summaries or watch a video and just go straight to it.
I say this having played all three.
I say this having played all three.
B_Spooky13
Member
Honestly I found getting into W2 very hard.. I really wanted to and tried multiple times. That beginning section was hard with all the mechanics they throw at you at once.
Witcher 3 though.. Man I cant even count how many hours I've put into it. 3rd playthrough
Witcher 3 though.. Man I cant even count how many hours I've put into it. 3rd playthrough
No.
W2 is closer to W3 then 1 though.
W1 = Classic but has bad shit combat = for fans of people writing every piece of detail book/text in video games , boring and shit combat
W2=Trying to go modern still maintaning root game, better combat etc =
W3= Trying to mainstream game.
it is like mass effect trilogy but third game done right.
W2 is closer to W3 then 1 though.
W1 = Classic but has bad shit combat = for fans of people writing every piece of detail book/text in video games , boring and shit combat
W2=Trying to go modern still maintaning root game, better combat etc =
W3= Trying to mainstream game.
it is like mass effect trilogy but third game done right.
Hamster Plugin
Member
I have a similar issue with the series. I tried to play The Witcher 1, but the game isn't grabbing me at all. I don't like the game's mechanics. I also heard that Witcher 2 has controller support, so the gameplay has to be different in that one.
Slightly different question about the series: Do you need to play Witcher 1 to enjoy Witcher 2?
Slightly different question about the series: Do you need to play Witcher 1 to enjoy Witcher 2?
I really feel I should do this. Although I found Witcher 1 wasn't really that good to play with a controller.
I would jump in at 2 but I always heard that Witcher 1 had some excellent storytelling and scenarios.
I never played the Witcher 1 or 2 but I thoroughly enjoyed 3.
My only complaint is I got a little lost in the sauce after making it to
. Everyone seems so "familiar" with each other. More so than anyone else previous to that portion of the game.
But honestly the main plot started losing my interest around that same time so I began to skip parts of conversation.
My only complaint is I got a little lost in the sauce after making it to
Skellige
But honestly the main plot started losing my interest around that same time so I began to skip parts of conversation.
Same.
So I have basically zero knowledge of 1 or 2, but never hindered my enjoyment of 3. The world is the star in 3, its just so believable.
I trade all my games in when I'm done, generally no exceptions; but I still have Witcher 3 and dip in and out of it, its just wonderful.
Complistic
Member
No, but you should play 2 because it's a good game. One should only be played by those curious to see how a new game studio can develop if they're managed properly. It is rough to say the least.
WaterAstro
Member
I'd say just cheat through them, or watch playthroughs.
I think I'm the only one in the world that probably enjoys TW1's combat lol.
I think I'm the only one in the world that probably enjoys TW1's combat lol.
thepenguin55
Member
Think as with any good sequel you'll get more out of The Witcher 3 if you played through the previous games but you won't really be lost in The Witcher 3 because you didn't play the previous games.
Alpha Phoenix
Member
The answer is Not Really. However, Witcher 2 especially is a great game in its own right and I firmly believe you should play it if you call yourself an RPG fan.
Not really but it'll make the story less confusing and more fulfilling especially when you see some characters return. Lore, recurring characters and world building is established in the first game. Second game gets into the politics and builds upon some aspects of the world. There's no reason not to play them if you're interested.
No you don't. Witcher 3 isn't good because it had great games before it, which it had. It would elevate the experience because you'd be more attached to the world and especially it's characters and playing good games is fun anyway. But it's not required so one could enjoy W3.
You'r not the only one, preferred it over W2 combat that felt very lifted from popular action games of it's time Batman and AC.
You'r not the only one, preferred it over W2 combat that felt very lifted from popular action games of it's time Batman and AC.
I played W2 on X1 BC (got it for free during the holidays) before starting 3 (was in backlog since Black Friday).
While playing 2, I didn't feel like I was missing out on anything.
Then in Witcher 3, it was pretty awesome knowing the characters on most of the Gwent cards. Other than that, I'm not sure if there's a lot of connection between the 2.
I still suggest playing Witcher 2, it's structured in a completely different way than 3, and it was surprisingly good imo.
While playing 2, I didn't feel like I was missing out on anything.
Then in Witcher 3, it was pretty awesome knowing the characters on most of the Gwent cards. Other than that, I'm not sure if there's a lot of connection between the 2.
I still suggest playing Witcher 2, it's structured in a completely different way than 3, and it was surprisingly good imo.
JareBear: Remastered
Banned
Absolutely not.
Fanboys will tell you that W2 is as good as W3 but that's not true. You can easily just play W3 as it is so fantastic it makes the first two games irrelevant.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
You'll get more out of the games for certain. But no.
Usually I'm a stickler on finishing the first games in a series, before moving on.
That said, I played the hell out of the W1, loved it, but got stuck in the swamps, took a break, came back much later, couldn't do it. So then I gave in and watched the rest on youtube. (Summary).
With the Witcher 2, I tried a couple times, didn't get very far. Then before wild Hunt, I powered through and played it on Easy. That said, before I knew it I was enjoying myself, and felt as I rushed it too much. Great game.
Wild Hunt is a on a whole different level. It is in the top five if not THE best game I've ever played. It's just so close to perfect it's hard to believe.
Usually I'm a stickler on finishing the first games in a series, before moving on.
That said, I played the hell out of the W1, loved it, but got stuck in the swamps, took a break, came back much later, couldn't do it. So then I gave in and watched the rest on youtube. (Summary).
With the Witcher 2, I tried a couple times, didn't get very far. Then before wild Hunt, I powered through and played it on Easy. That said, before I knew it I was enjoying myself, and felt as I rushed it too much. Great game.
Wild Hunt is a on a whole different level. It is in the top five if not THE best game I've ever played. It's just so close to perfect it's hard to believe.
Interfectum
Member
Witcher 1 is so underrated on this forum. That game is fucking fantastic and shouldn't be skipped.
Ascenion
Member
That depends on how you look at it. Plot vs Plot Witcher 2 is superior. Witcher 3 drags at the end and has a pretty awful climax. It only shines through the side content. Not to mention it has a barely there villain .
eot
Banned
I like it but I don't think it's a game that would appeal to most people.
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
No, but it helps.
It's not like Mass Effect, it doesn't tell a continuing story but characters are introduced in the first games that appear in 3.
Witcher 1 is one of my favourite games of all time. The story in the game is beyond fantastic.
It's not like Mass Effect, it doesn't tell a continuing story but characters are introduced in the first games that appear in 3.
Witcher 1 is one of my favourite games of all time. The story in the game is beyond fantastic.
His Majesty
Banned
The Witcher 1 is the most dated game but features a great storyline with interesting characters to meet and also boasts the best atmosphere of the three games. The combat system is a rhythm-based clicking and turns many people off. Average playtime for me is around 50 hours. I have finished it 4 times now and it is undoubtedly one of my favourite games of all time
The Witcher 2 is a much more polished game but loses some of the atmosphere in the process. The game is very political and throws a lot of names and factions at you, can be difficult to get into. But the story is very rewarding and, in my opinion, the best of the three games. Also the only game which implements choice & consequence in a super ambitious manner.
The Witcher 3 is the love child of both games: the atmosphere and open world nature from The Witcher 1 and the polished storytelling and design from The Witcher 2.
The Witcher 2 is a much more polished game but loses some of the atmosphere in the process. The game is very political and throws a lot of names and factions at you, can be difficult to get into. But the story is very rewarding and, in my opinion, the best of the three games. Also the only game which implements choice & consequence in a super ambitious manner.
The Witcher 3 is the love child of both games: the atmosphere and open world nature from The Witcher 1 and the polished storytelling and design from The Witcher 2.