Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So I was looking at the Witcher 3 and was wondering if Witcher 1 and 2 were worth playing first?

Not required, but it helps provide you with background and reference to all the major players in 3. Overall? I found the series very enjoyable, even if the controls are a bit finicky. In most cases, though, I can adapt to such things without having it be a major deal-breaker.

I liked the grim-and-grimy world, the fact that it's not at all a happy genero-fantasy setting, nor so humourless as ASoIaF.

I have yet to get beyond the 1st Witcher game... and that's mostly because other stuff distracts me... but of what I have played, it is enjoyable. The controls might take some getting used to though.

Does Witcher 1 hold up ok, is it still playable?

 usernamesareannoying wrote:
Does Witcher 1 hold up ok, is it still playable?

I'd say so... I think last time I took a dip into the game was maybe 2 months ago. The character animations show their age a bit but I find it still enjoyable/playable.

 usernamesareannoying wrote:
So I was looking at the Witcher 3 and was wondering if Witcher 1 and 2 were worth playing first?

Very much so. the first two games are some of the games I have sunk the most time into. Good story lines and a very likebal world, but fair waring. Expect a ton of skin in the first game in particular

Yeah, the first game was actually their debut as a developer. So loads of odd choices, weird gameplay, aged graphics, etc. Still reasonably enjoyble though. Witcher 2 was a lot more focussed and competent, it still had a few minor issues, but nothing glaring afaik (havent actually played 2, just 1 and 3). And 3 is a masterpiece. Though Im not sure if it qualifies as fun... It *is* fun occasionally, but the word doesnt really accurately describe it, imo. Definitely worth picking up though.

At first I was turned way the hell off by the sheer amount of sex.
It literally drives the goddamn plot.
Then I was turned off by the sheer amount of self contained terminology that has no basis in real world events.
But if you can get past that...and that's a pretty big if....you'll find one of the best Western RPGs out there.
In regards to actually playing 1 and 2, avoid 1 like the plague and get the enhanced version of 2.

I do not recommend 1 or 2, and it's because of the grimdark. An RPG has to have a setting I want to spend tens of hours in, and the setting of the first two games is simply too unpleasant for me to want to wade through it. Not even for the promise of tits.

So I've made it in to act two of witcher 1 and its not bad. I'm playing the enhanced version and the Nudity isn't bad so far could be completely skipped if you wanted. I did run across a nude dryad but that's about it outside of the romance cards so far.
I kind of like the cards, it's a bit of a side adventure and the dice games are kind of fun too.
I do however miss any sort of gauge on enemy health though. Trying to decide to stay in a fight or run is annoying =P

Wasnt enemy health shown on the ground? At their feet basically? Might be wrong, its been a while...

As to the game being "too grimdark"... dont really see it. Sure, its not a nice world, but its a reasonably realistic world (considering its fantasy, anyway).

Not played the first one, but the second one and especially the third one are amazing.

 AlexHolker wrote:
I do not recommend 1 or 2, and it's because of the grimdark. An RPG has to have a setting I want to spend tens of hours in, and the setting of the first two games is simply too unpleasant for me to want to wade through it. Not even for the promise of tits.

Presumably you would recommend the third one though, even though its at least as grim dark as the earlier games? I don't think that I have played a darker game than the third but at least it pulls off its grim dark well due to its superior world building and story telling.

I bounced of the first one 3 or 4 times, generally when I get to Vizima although I did get quite far in 1 playthrough. Its ok but its nothing special in this day and age.

The second one is a lot better but it is also a lot more consolised (lots of really obvious corridors that you are funneled down in a supposedly open world). I have finished it twice, considering the sheer size of the game says quite a lot.

I'm about 60 hours into the third one and I am still poking around Skellige.

 ThePrimordial wrote:

Then I was turned off by the sheer amount of self contained terminology that has no basis in real world events.

Well it is a fantasy game, what did you expect? As for the sex I find it refreshing for a game to be realistic and open about sex and its portrayal of believable relationships. There is quite a lot of casual sex as well but its perfectly in keeping with the setting and the characters so I see it as a positive thing in terms of world building. I appreciate a game that is not afraid to treat its players as adults; in this regard, in fact in most/all others as well, the Witcher series is streets ahead of the staid and frankly rather pathetic fumblings that Bioware inflict upon the world.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 AlexHolker wrote:
I do not recommend 1 or 2, and it's because of the grimdark. An RPG has to have a setting I want to spend tens of hours in, and the setting of the first two games is simply too unpleasant for me to want to wade through it. Not even for the promise of tits.

Presumably you would recommend the third one though, even though its at least as grim dark as the earlier games? I don't think that I have played a darker game than the third but at least it pulls off its grim dark well due to its superior world building and story telling.

I have not played the third one. I have heard it is better than its predecessors from someone who hated the other two, but I cannot speak from personal experience.

It's meant to be grimdark. It does grimdark better than Warhammer does, either in Fantasy or 40K. If you can't get with that then, yeah, it's definitely not a series for you. This is not a land of happy elves and kindly old wizards. This is a medieval setting where you can tell that someone must be a king because he doesn't have sh*t all over him.

And if the grimdark of 1 and 2 was a turn-off, you're going to hate 3, which takes the events of 1 and 2 to their natural, bloody, war-torn conclusions. Basically, it's not a good time to be *anyone* (especially if you are the king that pisses me off).

I have only played The Witcher III and I loved every minute of it. The choices and consequences (that often do not appear to way after the initial Choice) are very good. I have never played the first two though.

It's worth knowing the full part story and the characters / their relationship. The first Witcher has a very annoying combat system and inventory management / brewing potions is quite clunky to say the least.

The second part of the series proved to be much better and really stands the test of time. Combat is right between the first and the third game, the writing is still awesome.

In general, the Witcher series is far and above everything else on the AA / AAA video games market in regards to writing and is only rivaled by a few indie games that then lack on other parts such as graphics.

The series is worth your time and you will not regret playing it.

 Lord Scythican wrote:
I have only played The Witcher III and I loved every minute of it. The choices and consequences (that often do not appear to way after the initial Choice) are very good. I have never played the first two though.

There is much the same sort of thing as that, consequences and effects of your actions that don't show up until quite some time later, in the earlier Witcher games. It is an interesting take on the "Paragon vs Renegade" idea of other games, wherein you generally know the results of your actions, good or bad, and have all pertinent information at your disposal to know if you are doing the Good thing or the Bad thing. Not so in the Witcher series. Most of the decisions of this type you are required to make are done with incomplete information, with people having lied to you, with vague clues having been handed to you hours earlier in the game, in apparently-unrelated conversations, so on and so forth. You might choose something that seems like the right choice (at the time), only to later learn that, no, you were duped, and you've doomed an entire village or something.

Not only that, but generally, you dont get to choose between good and evil, you just get to decide *which* evil. So deciding is difficult even if you already know the consequences of your actions.

I am wondering about buying all three as a combo pack, playing the first two on ultra easy mode just to run through the storyline before settling into Witcher 3.

I havent played any of them and done by best to avoid spoilers, but I am hearing a lot of good stuff about Witcher 3 and want to give it a go.

What do you guys think of my 'solution'? Or should I play Witcher 1 & 2 properly. I hear they are a bit arcady, which I am not too keen on.

Sounds good to me. The first one's combat is really annoying and I highly recommed rushing through it and getting to the good aka story parts.

The second game is a lot better and feels more like an action-adventure-RPG - if I was you, I'd give it a try first and if it doesn't appeal to you, rush through it.

It definitely is worth playing those because your decisions from all games /do/ carry over. Your choices actually matter!

Next thing, is there an easy mode that bypasses game difficulty and time so I can story rush the older titles?

It might be good to play the second properly if I can settle into it.

Sadly, there is none to our knowledge. Easy mode, however, is plenty easy and allows you to get through most fights quickly. Focus on getting the Group stance, (C) if I remember correctly, as it deals a good amount of damage and you don't need to specifically select a certain stance for enemies and / or chance stances in battle. Plus, on easy, you don't need to meddle with potion mixing at all - which saves a lot of time and searching millions of crates, barrels, etc.

The thing is that even the side quests in The Witcher (1) are both well-written / enjoyable and sometimes have quite an impact on the overall story.

Sorry I can't be of more help, but it's tough with those games

In general, check those mods out:

http://www.nexusmods.com/witcher/mods/top/?

Some are really good and enchance your experience. The Genie mod basically is a cheat for various things that might allow you to get through the game even faster by granting more gold, talents etc.

Yeah, always max out group.
You will always be outnumbered in The Witcher 1, and Group style gets more powerful the more enemies you hit.

Witcher 1 was not to my taste. The story tried to be dark, but destroyed it with comical one-liners or gakky flirting. The controls suck at first glance, but after you get used to them, they are okay.

Witcher 2 is a lot about politics and can get rather confusing. But it still looks good, combat is completly different from part 1 and a mod from one of the developers (Combat Rebalance) overhauls is again. Both combat variants have their flaws. Story is good and does a lot better job than part 1. Your choices in the first act can completly change act 2. Sex is much better integrated.

Haven't played Witcher 3 yet, but will probably get it in the Steam summer sale. I should be fed up with XCOM 2 and Dark Souls 3 till then

If there's one trilogy I love more than Mass Effect It's the Witcher series. I bought the game based on a few screenshots and I think a small blurb of text here and there and maybe a few people talking about it. Man it entranced me. I was blown away by the game being that good. It was a little rough but the story and characters shone through even back then. i got Witcher 1 on launch and all of them since. I own two copies of Witcher 2 and don't mind.

I even missed out preordering the collectors edition and had to buy it for 500 bucks from some scalpers. I did it anyways (witcher 3's). I have my own real life gwent card decks and everything. I wish they kept dice poker in Witcher 3 I loved in in 1 and 2 but Gwent is also super fun. I'm happy to see you enjoyed 1 even if its a little rough around the edges. Also Witcher 2 has the unresolved Saskia plot. I hope they do a small mini-game/expansion where that gets resolved and we find out what happened with Iorveth. :(

I've beaten all the games on the hardest difficulty. Just finishing up Witcher 3 now on the hardest difficulty (second playthrough) and I'm about to play the first expansion for the first time. Shout out to the foul mouthed Thaler the Temerian spymaster who is my favourite side character. I laughed so hard seeing him again after all these years.

FWIW, CD Projekt Red's next announced game is Cyberpunk 2077, based off of the RPG by R. Talsorian Games. Though I haven't seen any new news about the game's development since the initial announcement two years ago. IIRC, the company also recently announced that they're working on another title, but declined to provide any information about it.

So hopefully more good stuff coming down the pipeline from them soon.

That Cyberpunk trailer was total nerdgasm for me, I have been a huge fan of R. Talsorian's game since it first launched like a millennia ago.

I haven't found them fun because of the combat and controls but I'm persevering with Witcher 3 where I didn't for the others because of the world and atmosphere.

Btw anyone else notice the similarity in part of the music and that of Tell Tale's Walking Dead?

Karkasy wrote:
I haven't found them fun because of the combat and controls but I'm persevering with Witcher 3 where I didn't for the others because of the world and atmosphere.

Btw anyone else notice the similarity in part of the music and that of Tell Tale's Walking Dead?

Might be the same composer.