Current Events > The Witcher

(+) Yeah! (+)

Someone lent me Wild Hunt, but I want to at least play the first two games. Been meaning to read the books. How important is release order in this series

You can play 3 without knowing anything about the previous 2.

---

vbty3 posted...

You can play 3 without knowing anything about the previous 2.

Why is that

sLaCkEr408___RJ posted...

Why is that

Its pretty standalone. Playing the previous games will enrich the experience, but is not needed at all. As far as I know, the references to the other games are minimal.

---

The games do reference events that took place in the books, but you should be able to gather the meaning from the context of the conversation.

---

As someone who marathon the 3 Witcher games in a row, its not really necessary but it does gives a better understanding of what's going on.

W1 gives Geralt a blank state since they went with the amnesia route and has a more focused & cohesive story. The battle system is pretty janky though. Potions are most lore accurate here. Consequences from choices you make won't be apparent until in much later acts. Fetch quests up the wazoo but this is more of a product of its time issue.

W2 is a much better improvement with better branching paths and more meaningful side quests. Good crafting system. Potions are still lore friendly. Story got a little heavier into politics, but not that hard to follow.

W3 will take a lot of time for me to write and I can't be arsed right now lol.

I didn't read the books but I heard it helps to enrich the experience as well, though the point of W1 is to start from scratch with your own take on Geralt.
---

do yourself a favor and skip W1, just watch the story on youtube. that game doesn't hold up well.

W2 is ok, though i wouldn't say the story is necessary to understand W3.

---

monkmith posted...

W2 is ok, though i wouldn't say the story is necessary to understand W3.

Yeah, I was kinda miffed that a super major plot point was only mentioned in passing in W3.
---

St0rmFury posted...

Yeah, I was kinda miffed that a super major plot point was only mentioned in passing in W3.

you've got to keep in mind that geralt doesn't really give a fuck about politics. you as the player might care, and you might have chosen a path that got you really involved in the political drama that was the second game; but they treat that decision as non-cannon since cannon geralt would ho-hum his way through that crap to do what he needs to do to save the few people he cares about.

it takes away from the immersion, but the alternative is a shallow plot that can be used to fit all branches.

---

You can do TW3 without playing the previous games, but you may want to read a wiki or something to catch up on previous games, just to catch the references.

---

monkmith posted...

do yourself a favor and skip W1, just watch the story on youtube. that game doesn't hold up well.

I recently replayed it and had a fucking blast. Just make sure you play on hard

---

ex2wing posted...

monkmith posted...

do yourself a favor and skip W1, just watch the story on youtube. that game doesn't hold up well.

I recently replayed it and had a fucking blast. Just make sure you play on hard

And get that movement speed mod. There's a lot of backtracking involved and there's no horse & fast travel.
---

monkmith posted...

you've got to keep in mind that geralt doesn't really give a fuck about politics. you as the player might care, and you might have chosen a path that got you really involved in the political drama that was the second game; but they treat that decision as non-cannon since cannon geralt would ho-hum his way through that crap to do what he needs to do to save the few people he cares about.

I don't really see a path in TW2 that doesn't get you heavily involved in politics.

---

I went into Witcher 3 with no knowledge of the lore and its one of my favorite games ever. Its the only game Ive completed 3x consecutively with each playthrough at 120+ hours.

i see ppl talk about 3's dlc more than the main game

---

With the PC version, you can import your save from 1 to 2, and 2 to 3.

---

I will say that the first Witcher game is a little...weird story-wise. For instance, you might have heard of Triss and Yennefer. While they're both sorcerers, they're completely different personality-wise. But in Witcher 1, Triss is Yennefer in all but name.

008Zulu posted...

With the PC version, you can import your save from 1 to 2, and 2 to 3.

This doesn't do much tbh. The games don't really care about what choices you made in the previous one.

---

pegusus123456 posted...

This doesn't do much tbh. The games don't really care about what choices you made in the previous one.

You start off with better gear. And at the end of Witcher 2, you can choose to let Letho live. He then shows up in 3, with a quest, and again later to help with a certain quest further in to the game.

---

vbty3 posted...

You can play 3 without knowing anything about the previous 2.

In the same way you can play ME3 without knowing anything about the previous games

---

008Zulu posted...

You start off with better gear. And at the end of Witcher 2, you can choose to let Letho live. He then shows up in 3, with a quest, and again later to help with a certain quest further in to the game.

Yeah, but that's about the extent of it. Like there's a decision in the first game that should have a major impact on the plot of the second,. There's a major plotline about who's going to be Foltest's heir. This is despite the fact that you can choose to cure Adda in the first game. She's briefly mentioned in the very beginning of the game, but they just shrug off the idea of her ruling Temeria.

---