The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

I normally find the middle book needlessly padded out to justify a trilogy when they could have just made two books. It has a bit of building up for the final book, but nothing that couldn’t have been done in the end of the first or start of the last book.

I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m just saying I feel there’s a weird obsession in both literature and film to make trilogies and a lot of the time it’s totally not needed. It’s like publishers consider it a Holy Trinity and authors/writers need to pander to them and stretch things out. JMHOFWIW.

Play 3 and if after 200 hours you need more Witcher, try 2, then 1.

Don’t forget there’s seven seasons of a TV Series coming as well.

I played the first game and tbh don’t remember much about it apart from the cheesecake, and that it playing it took some work.

I remember W2 as being a distinctly more polished and engaging, but again, the actual details are pretty fuzzy. If you have some time to spare, it should be fun.

Except for the broad outlines, not much of either game was still in my head when I started The Witcher 3, and it didn’t matter. But come to think of it, I would kind of like to have had the experience of playing W2 and going straight to W3.

Everyone take a shot. Someone asked The Witcher Question.

The best answer to this question is still Post Number 2027 in this thread:

Read that guide and dive into The Witcher 3.

You mean if after 200 hours you need more Witcher, then play the Blood & Wine DLC - that was a long one, wasn’t it?

Don’t forget to install The Witcher 3 HD Reworked Project.

Well, it is Netflix. So probably two.

I’ve been working my way through Witcher 1 and it’s pretty great. The areas are big enough to feel like an open world, without being exhausting to walk through. The combat takes a little getting used to, but it’s not bad. I recommend it – I’ve finished chapter 1 and it’s finally sunk its claws into me.

A warning: Witcher 1 does have many strengths, but it has severe pacing issues, particularly in Chapters 2 and 3. I’d say getting to the end of the game is worth the “low” parts, but they’re there.

Oh, I don’t think I ever escaped chapter 2, now that you mention it.

Thanks for letting me know. Better to expect it than to be surprised.

I started with 3 and it was fantastic. From context you can at least have a vague idea of Geralts past dealings with the characters he may have encountered before. I never felt lost.

I liked but didn’t love Witcher 2. Witcher 1 is unplayable to me in the way Final Fantasy VII is. It aged horrifically. I’ve heard from others that it has a good story, but when the list of side effects includes “Ocular Bleeding” I tend to lose interest in a product. And this is from someone who thinks Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup with tiles is fine, so I’m not averse to playing low-tech games. It’s just that initial style of “3d” aged so badly.

It’s also very easy to lock yourself out of a significant portion of the quests by triggering checkpoints in the main quest line. If you’re intent on playing the game I strongly advise you to look up a quest guide. It is one of the worst examples of sequencing issues I’ve ever seen in over 20 years of playing RPGs.

I don’t get this. Technologically and artistically is still looks quite beautiful and far cry from the truly early 3D games (like FF7).

I have no problem immersing myself in it even today.

I’ll happily admit the screenshots look better than I remember. But I suspect there was something about seeing the game in motion and how clunky everything felt that really turned me off. Honestly I can’t even remember my exact criticism, all I can say is that the game did not pull me in and I was pretty heavily invested in Geralt of Rivia, so it shouldn’t have been a tough sell for me.

The only “clunk” I can see is in the dialogue animations, which are very basic and static…otherwise, if the OTS mode is chosen, it plays like a standard third person game with WSAD and mouse…although the combat is based on animations instead of hitboxes like in later games.

After many starts and stops, in 2012-2013, I finally played The Witcher 1 from start to finish and:

  1. Enjoyed it immensely,
  2. Marveled constantly at how amazing the world looked in the game, and what an astonishing tech achievement the game was still, in 2013, and
  3. Found it incredibly playable, the story interesting, and overall the game to be nowhere near as janky as I had expected it to be.

Don’t forget, they substantially improved the original Witcher release with the ‘enhanced edition’ a year later.