That’s fair. It’s not the smoothest start. Such an amazing game though.
I found Witcher 2 super janky, I still don’t understand how they went from that to the Witcher 3, it doesn’t seem possible. If time were a factor I’d just skip straight to 3. I don’t think there has been a better RPG since Morrowind, but there is value to be had from playing everything if you have hours to wile away.
Having bounced off WItcher 1 and 2 when they came out, and then finding Witcher 3 to be right up there with the Mass Effect series as my favorite RPG ever, I’d say start with Witcher 3, which is the most mature of the series and is chock full of amazing storytelling.
Then, if you love W3, you might be driven to tolerate W1 and 2’s issues because of the W3 experience.
I agree with this advice and I played through the games in order. I would never recommend a new player start with 1 or 2 – Witcher 3 is just so much more refined and accessible than the earlier games.
It’s true that a new player to the series will frequently think “I don’t understand the history or context of what’s happening here.” This will still happen even if you’ve played the other games first, though!
Thanks so much everyone. I feel like I do have a bit of the history and context from the TV show, for whatever that’s worth.
It sounds like skipping straight to Witcher 3 is what I should end up doing. Honestly the thought of firing up W1 again tonight is just not appealing.
The Witcher 1 was made using a heavily modified version of the NWN1 engine. So hills were a bit of an obstacle.
I’ll throw my hat into the ring with the “you should at least try W2”. It was a major leap from W1, and when it came out on the Xbox 360 all the combat stuff/opening had been ironed out, and it played great with the controller. The narrative structure, characters, and choice/consequences basically one-upped everything Bioware had done up to that point, and established what the studio cloud do. Then they ‘just’ turned all of that into an open world with W3. I absolutely agree that W3 is a better game, but W2 is no slouch, and it sets stuff up in the 3rd game well.
Also, if playing on Xbox, they apparently really over-programed that version, and included texture resolutions and effects that couldn’t really even be utilized by the hardware at the time… but playing in back compat on the Series (and I think even the One gen) consoles is a huge upgrade over how it released.
For me, the atmosphere and music of W1 were the best. I played all 3 and that is the one I remember most fondly.
I’d probably hate it today though. I can’t stand cut scenes and yammering NPCs anymore.
I personally bounced off Witcher 1, but really really enjoyed Witcher 2 and fell in love with W3.
I played 3 a few years ago, taking the advice to catch up on the lore from 1 and 2 via Youtube. I realize I’ll never know for sure what I missed, but I had a great time and didn’t come close to running out of game.
Yeah, I’m not saying “don’t play Witcher 2.” I’m saying “Play Witcher 3 and the engagement it will give you in the story will make you more tolerant of the issues in W1 and 2.” :)
I’m still kind of surprised CDP hasn’t released remasters/gameplay updates of W1 and W2. Well, I’d be surprised if I wasn’t still waiting on Cyberpunk to get updated/fixed.
I’m on the ‘skip Witcher 1, play Witcher 2’-train. In fact, I’d even suggest you play Witcher 2 twice. Or, alternatively, replay the part from the point where you have to make a choice about what questline you follow, thereby skipping the other. So you get to see the differences in outcome, depending on your choice.
I bought and played The Witcher 1 the day it came out. I finished it and it was fairly long, and I only remember good things about it.
The first chapter was fun. I murdered a mob of towns folk. Chapter 2 is your typical long town crawl. It definitely challenges Witcher neutrally more by presenting two warring factions. I ended up siding with the Elves/Dwarves. Apparently if you stay neutral then both sides are hostile to you at the end.
The one thing I couldn’t get passed playing W2 in backwards compatibility on XSX was the wild camera swings. I just couldn’t get used to how damn sensitive it was. I made myself dizzy after awhile playing.
Funny you should mention that. I actually booted it up list night after writing that- I have it on disk, but picked it up on some Xbox sale for like $3. Yeah, the camera is really sensitive, and there’s no way to adjust it. I wonder if that’s an artifact of the improved performance, somehow?
Witcher 2 is the Dark Souls of Witcher games. It’s the hardest one by far.
Some of the combat encounters are bloody challenging (particularly when you fight another witcher) and the prologue throws you right into the fucking fire. (and there is literally dragon fire)
I remember the camera being a pain as well. I also think W2 combat falls somewhere in-between 1 and 3. It’s like they almost had the more action-based combat figured out, but it still relied on some black box calculations that weren’t reflected in what you sometimes saw on screen. I don’t have any way to prove that, just what it felt like to me.
That said, the story and how all that works is great. If you can deal with the jank, W2 is solid.
Mirror fights are the worst, and this is the nastiest one since Castlevania III. Totally fair call-out.
The first Witcher is terrible and it didn’t age well at all. The combat is worse than Gothic 1-3, euro-jank on steroids. I firmly believe the Gothic fan base elevated the game due to lack of alternatives and essentially funded the sequels. I don’t recall the story at all. The second is much better, engaging story, interesting branching, there’s stuff to explore (particularly the big city) and the combat is better. The third takes story telling to the next level, with some side quests having stories better than other full games and it opens up the world but it fails to evolve the combat.