So, I just bought the witcher trilogy off steam and I was wondering: how important is it that i play the first game? my friends say the first game is crappy and not worth playing, but i dont want to miss any important details.
Should I play it, or skip to the second game?
Other urls found in this thread:
It's good, but it plays differently from the other 2. If you have time, play it, you wouldn't be disappointed.
Definitely play it, gameplay takes some while to get used but the story and characters are great.
3 > 1 > 2
I wished i skipped the first one the story is pretty good but the combat made me wanna kill myself. I say you just read a story synopsis of the first one and go straight to 2
dont bother with the side quests, rush main quests only
You aren't missing out on much desu, if you decide to skip it
1 > 3 > 2
I just noticed Witcher 2 in my steam library and started installing it, how big of a mistake have I made?
story is good but the gameplay is terrible
just play on easy and mow your way through the action bits
First he has the best combat.
It goes to shit in the next 2 games.
Whether you enjoy it or not comes down to how fast it takes for your brain to wrap around the combat mechanics, someone told me it's mechanically more in line with one of those music games where you have to synchronize with the beat.
Play it it's fuckin great
>Should I play it, or skip to the second game?
That depends.
Do you have ADD?
I stop playing a game if it really just drags on and isn't fun
TW2 is pretty pointless in the realm of things. TW1 is basically a rehash of certain parts of the books with Alvin as a stand in for Ciri and Triss as a stand in for Yen and the combat can be seen as terrible but I liked it. TW3 is incredible though.
It's a flawed gem.
I loved it.
The combat in the first game is actually pretty unique. I like it. You've just got to remember it isn't an action game.
Witcher 1 is the best Witcher game
disagree; witcher 2 rules.
If anything I would skip the second game because it's the worst one (albeit still good) and has nothing to do with 1 or 3.
witcher 2 events set up the setting of witcher 3
Your friend is a fool.
It's the best RPG in the series without a doubt. 3rd one became Assassin's Creed with good writing and graphics.
>ciri was never a time travelling antagonist
Is the first Witcher game playable with a controller?
I'm talking about the story, the story of TW1 the protagonist has to be Geralt and the story of TW3 it NEEDS to be Geralt but the story of TW2 could be different and it wouldn't change much.
Rule of thumb:
If you want to play a series where most say that the first is the worst: begin with the first.
Otherwise you'll always compare it with the better successors and it will spoil your experience. If you don't like the game you can always stop playing. But at least it will be because of an more honest reason.
>good writing
I just recently played it so it's not nostalgia talking here.
It's one of my favorite games of all time. Holy shit I had so much fun playing it. Give it a try.
I'm on the Witcher 2 and it can't really keep my attention like 1 did. I just got to flotsam though so I can't judge yet.
Play it on Normal imo, easy is way too easy and requires no alchemy, which is a really cool part of the game that I basically missed out on.
Op, the first game has not aged well... like, it is really really bad by today's standards in terms of voice acting, character expression, and gameplay.
I loved TW2, I loved TW3. Fuck, I loved dragon age origins back in the day. I couldn't play TW1.
I get it was low budget, and i wish i could have played it when it first came out, but i just can't do it.
Combat sucks. There is a meme that the combat is fine, but it isn't.
Story is good but it is unfortunately irrelevant. Some of the plot points are referenced in Witcher 3, but is nothing significant.
even if that is the case it still has a good story thats better than 3's story imo
If you don't think the first game is good you are a normie and need to get
Just play the first on easy mode and get the story out of it. the gameplay on easy is just click on thing, not die and progress
Fuck you, tw2 was amazing. Plus even if it's only a few things, characters like Letho won't have the same impact unless you play TW2 first.
It's a little clunky though, if you're playing on PC OP turn v-sync off because it causes crazy input delay even on incredible machines, and play with a controller if you can. I usually don't bother but i ended up using a ps4 controller, really helped the experience, and a mod to change the prompts to ps4 prompts.
Give it a fair go with a fresh mind.
Sorry man, but it's like listening to a highschool play and the characters are so deep in the uncanny valley it's creepy as fuck now.
It's the perfect example of a game aging incredibly poorly.
Alright, I'll do it for you user. I'll get through the Witcher.
For real this time.
i'm trying to throw the W3 fans a bone here, they'll lynch me if I don't praise it at all.
i dropped that snoozefest after 40 hours of following glowing red trails.
1 is fucking fantastic and the only people I know to disagree on that are people who mostly play on consoles.
1 has a decent story, mediocre characters and decent gameplay.
2 has the best story, great characters but the gameplay is utter fucking shit.
3 has the worst main story, but good characters hold it up, gameplay is the best in the series.
3=1 in my opinion.
That is simply false. If anything, 1's story has little to do with 2 or 3.
2 pretty much tells the events that lead to nilfgard invading the north.
Enjoyed the second a lot
Was blown away by the third
Didn't have fun with the first and I stopped about 6 hours in
The dialogue in the first Witcher makes Deus Ex look like Shakespeare
Nigga I first played it four years ago.
It's fine.
I disagree and my ps4 collects dust while I play on PC
The swordplay in tw1 is just so bad
Go get 'em, tiger.
whats wrong with witcher 2's gameplay? i thought its combat was better than 3's
I played The Witcher 2 when it came out and I recently decided to play through the whole trilogy. I'm playing through the first one right now and it's fucking great. I tried picking it up twice and just absolutely hated the combat. As soon as you pick up that you hold the left click until the sword icon glows, then let go and hold left click again you won't have that issue.
I'm only in chapter 2 and I already like it more than The Witcher 2.
The only one I've actually had the patience to play and actually enjoy is 3. The combat in Witcher 1 is weird but I'd say Witcher 2 is far worse even though it is pretty good narrative wise.
...
Then you obviously do not enjoy cRPGs as a genre. If you think of Witcher 1 as a third person action-RPG you're already wrong and will obviously not understand it.
Menus are horrible console garbage where you scroll everywhere. 1 had a nice UI where you saw everything. Potions and oils had to be applied before combat and they only lasted a couple of minutes, WHY? Gameplay was something like
>roll roll roll do a couple of strikes and roll roll roll
Dodge that was added in W3 really helped that out. Also in 2 Geralt started spinning towards the enemies in really annoying ways if you attacked at a certain distance.
You don't need to hold left click until it glows, you just need to click once then click again when your sword glows/the icon glows (the icon is gone when you're on hard)
I played 2 on easy so I never used oils or potions. I found it to be very enjoyable ride.
just play in order so you can port of your saves to the next.. makes the overall story much better.. but really it comes down to which side you want to be on, yo.. humans or elfs.. some shit like that
Oh...that makes sense. It's weird how the combat seems almost like a hybrid between turn-based and real-time.
TW1 and TW2 are pretty good games. As story rich as the series is, however, I don't consider them a must for TW3. Ciri and Yennefer, basically the main secondary characters, never appear in the first two games and are only mentioned here and there. Though there are some returning characters, it doesn't add an incredible amount that you met them in the first two. Really anyone who says you must play the first two games should be saying you need to read the books, too.
I suggest either to play them all in order or just start at TW3. Starting at TW2 would be awkward. You start off as a bodyguard, which gives a completely false impression of what Geralt's career actually is, and the game doesn't do a fantastic job of explaining what the fuck a Witcher even is right away.
Despite some things being simplified like how you just regenerate potions instead of brewing them, I say that the open world of TW3 does a better job at portraying a professional monster slayer.
>tfw Sup Forums is the only place that respects 1 as good game
As shit as this board is it's still best place to discuss vidya.
also the first and second have a little fun "cheat" in selling shit which allows you to sell double of what you have.. which can make you rich and not need to spend hours extra to get the shit you need.. best for speed runs.. i forget the "cheat" but just take a look online and you'll find it.. this shit literally happens in a lot of games like this
To each their own I guess. I dont think I've ever played a game on easy, I always aim to play on the hardest difficulty so I have to get a good look at all the aspects of a game, especially combat.
What you said about TW2 were my exact problems. TW1 portrayed him as a skilled swordsman, even if the animations looked a little silly sometimes. TW2 was just a fucking rollfest. He was such a badass in TW1, now he's a faggot pussy rolling away from enemies because that's the optimal way to play the game. Also I sure loved meditating to drink potions just to have them expire in a fucking cutscene before a battle.
One thing I only half disagree with is the UI, comparing TW2 to TW3. I sort of wish I could see the names next to oils and potions. Though the biggest issue is how long the tooltip takes to fade in when trying to find the right oil.
I actually prefer a more text-based UI as opposed to big icons for the item, though more compact than TW2's. Perfect examples for me are most JRPGs or the SkyUI mod for Skyrim.
...
word.. playing on easy is shit and then you don't even have to use certain specialties or items.. if you play on basic/easy/casual/faggot you are just going it for the zerg rush or just to see a barely playible movie.. pros go hardest
>skip the best game to play the worst game
why would someone do this?
>Try getting into the Witcher series
>Start by playing the first one
>Pretty good so far
>Reach the fucking swamp
Three times I've tried to get into the game and the three of them I always drop it there. Fuck whoever made that fucking trash.
>I actually prefer a more text-based UI as opposed to big icons for the item, though more compact than TW2's. Perfect examples for me are most JRPGs or the SkyUI mod for Skyrim.
Nice to see I'm not alone in that. So many people say grid inventories are better, and I just don't see it. It was one of the things that really pissed me off about Morrowind when I tried it a while back.
just fucking run away from the plants you negro
It has the best plot imo, and is essential especially if you haven't read the books.
Nah, gonna watch a let's play/walkthrough or something to get the rest of the plot. Never really liked the gameplay anyway.
I tried to play 1 but the combat was just too goofy. The animations were also off-putting.
I read up on the story for 1 and then played 2 which I really enjoyed.
I tried playing the first game years back and got fed up during the slog of the second act.
Couple of years ago, went back to it and got through to the third act, it really started to pick up then and I marathoned the rest of the game, it was a real blast and a great story.
Then the second game was also pretty great, wasn't into the story as much but the gameplay improved and it got me excited for the third game.
Then the third, and in my opinion the best game, came around and I realized how much shit I didn't know about the world and characters.
I still finished it and the DLCs but now I'm going back and reading through all of the books. I think the last one hasn't been translated yet though.
>skipping a solid RPG because your ADD-riddled retards can't play anything without ZANY!! combat
I've been playing it and having it great time. Reading everyones opinions on skipping the side content I could understand because it can take a lot longer, but it also is somewhat necessary on hard. Spent about 2 hours so far and only on chapter 2 haha
I don't think the combat is that bad to be honest as it's fairly easy and almost reminiscent of batman arkham games except a bit convoluted.
I recommend playing the first chapter on hard or medium before deciding to skip, can take as little as 30 minutes if you rush.
Also, to add to this it was awesome seeing the intro cinematic in context in the book.
youtube.com
the swamp wasnt that bad mang
I think I just have trouble getting into RPGs that don't let me play a full spellcaster.
>its a "witcher 1's combat isn't awful" episode.
you guys don't have to be contrarian you know?
>skipping games
take your pills kid
Not all of us have ADD.
Pretty sure anyone saying it is good is a shitposter.
The gameplay has always been the weakest part of the whole series, only slightly improving in the sequels.
The rest of the game makes up for it though.