Current Events > Which The Witcher game to start with?

(+) Yeah! (+)

.
---

The first one is a chore to play
---

Guy_Fieri posted...

The first one is a chore to play

:( rly? i wanted to try it and 2

I feel like I'm in the minority of people that really enjoyed the first game
---

I mean if you wanna try it out then be my guest but it really has not aged well IMO.
---

the 1st game was amazing, the second game was a chore imo
---

solosnake posted...

the 1st game was amazing, the second game was a chore imo

This the story in the first was amazing, its dated but still would play that over the 2nd one again
---

They are all chores to play.

2 is the only one with decent writing
---

Guy_Fieri posted...

I mean if you wanna try it out then be my guest but it really has not aged well IMO.

What about the first story didn't age well?

bump
---

I started with 3 and I still enjoy it a lot. Sure there are lots of stuff that I feel like I lose out on because I don't have references.
---

I loved 1, it just gets repetitive. I still need to play 2, Witcher 3 is a goddamn massive masterpiece.
---

3 is the best by far, but it doesn't give a shit if you didn't play the previous games. Certain relationships will be completely lost on you if you didn't play 1 or 2.
---

1 has mediocre combat (and is imbalanced somewhat in that the first boss is borderline impossible on the highest difficulty unless you randomly get Aard to let you instantly kill it) and some of the areas are really bleh, but I still really liked the story and town areas. It has a lot of emphasis on proper potion use which you may or may not like.

2 has fantastic combat (it's a lot more freeform than the other two games with rolling being essential for mobility but not having i-frames, signs are really cool and fun to use, and bombs are ridiculously useful here), but a really limited alchemy system because you simply aren't allowed to have more than three potions at once (there's a skill that lets you have a fourth that does literally nothing but allow exactly one bad combination of four potions because of toxicity limits). Story is excellent and has massive branching to the point where all of chapter 2 (like 40% of the game) is totally different based on your route. Difficulty varies a lot; on the hardest difficulties, I would get one-shot in some areas but tank several hits from other things just nearby. I would never recommend skipping this one.

3 has okay combat, not as simple as 1 but a lot more repetitive than 2. It's really, really easy to become overpowered as hell and break the game. (Pure melee is OP, Igni is OP against anything that burns, alchemy is less powerful normally but there's a DLC skill that makes it so stupidly broken it's silly) Story is also fantastic and it has some goddamn amazing sidequests. Being open world doesn't really do a lot for the game other than add travel time, though, because there's not a lot of interesting things you'll find while travelling between the obvious landmarks.
---

2nd game is great, start there.
---

I've only played 2 & 3, but 2 is definitely worth playing.
---

The first game is still amazing, though I can understand how the combat might put some people off. I personally loved it. One mistake people tend to make is judging it too quickly. As you advance in the game, so does the combat. The core mechanics are still the same but it gets much more deep and strategic
---

Try the first one, if you don't like it, read about the story and go to 2. I would really recommend at least reading the wiki entries of the books before you play 2.
---

Witcher 1 is a serious slog, but imo it's still worth the experience

Witcher 2 is fantastic. Roche path does MGSV better than MGSV did

Never finished Witcher 3 because it's slow and uninteresting tbh
---

brotrrwinner posted...

The first game is still amazing, though I can understand how the combat might put some people off. I personally loved it. One mistake people tend to make is judging it too quickly. As you advance in the game, so does the combat. The core mechanics are still the same but it gets much more deep and strategic

IDK, I remember it being basically a flowchart:

Drink potions for regen and sign intensity if need be.
Does Aard let you one-shot it? Do that.
Does Igni work well on it? Use that.
Otherwise just use appropriate style for enemy, or group style if there are 3 or more enemies (group is weird, it like instantly crits and one-shots everything if there are 3 or more and does nothing otherwise).
---

The music, story, and writing still make the first one worth playing through. While its combat is mediocre and it can get pretty repetitive, it's definitely worth a shot. Second one improves in nearly all aspects. Third one is a more refined open world version of the second game in my opinion. One of the few series that got better with each title. First one is an 8/10, second one is a 9/10, and third one is a 10/10. Try the first one, if you can't get into it, go to the second one. If you still can't get into that one, then go to the third one. But make sure you give each game at least a fair shot of a 4-5 hours or so.

Pretty even responses so far

Thanks for the posts, these are helpful
---

Cartwheel_Kick posted...

Guy_Fieri posted...

The first one is a chore to play

:( rly? i wanted to try it and 2

2 is real good.

Ruvan22 posted...

Guy_Fieri posted...

I mean if you wanna try it out then be my guest but it really has not aged well IMO.

What about the first story didn't age well?

melee combat in witcher 1 is REALLY bad. the win button is igni igni igni and i honestly felt that trying to actually do swordplay was a mistake.

writing in all 3 is great though
---

The Witcher is one of the worst-handling games I've ever attempted to play, and the fact that it got a sequel is nothing short of a miracle.


The Witcher 3 is arguably one of the greatest video games of all time and is truly a testament to how good open world games can and should be. It should be the standard of quality against which all videogames are measured. It's seriously that fucking good.
---

bump
---

I only played 3 but it was a chore (other than the two expansions, which were way more interesting than the actual game)
---

Never played 1 or 2. Played about 20 hours of 3. It was fun, but if you are a 100% completionist like me, the game is bugged to the point of unplayable (for the completionist): there are some sidequests that get ruined and are impossible to complete if you explore too much. Unacceptable for an open world game. I just quit because I didn't want to start over or think about how many potential future side quests I've already ruined.
---

I couldn't stand 1 or 2 tbqh
---

If you can get through 1 it's worth seeing the game and production values evolve.

I don't think Witcher 1 is that bad. It's playable. Combat is basic and repetitive and it's a bit janky but the story is still quite good. But yeah it gets way better with 2.

Witcher 3 does reward you with a bit of fan service if you play through 1. It still has plot points from that game.
---

Amputation posted...

Never played 1 or 2. Played about 20 hours of 3. It was fun, but if you are a 100% completionist like me, the game is bugged to the point of unplayable (for the completionist): there are some sidequests that get ruined and are impossible to complete if you explore too much. Unacceptable for an open world game. I just quit because I didn't want to start over or think about how many potential future side quests I've already ruined.

What ones are you talking about? I don't remember this in the game at all.
---

Darmik posted...

Amputation posted...

Never played 1 or 2. Played about 20 hours of 3. It was fun, but if you are a 100% completionist like me, the game is bugged to the point of unplayable (for the completionist): there are some sidequests that get ruined and are impossible to complete if you explore too much. Unacceptable for an open world game. I just quit because I didn't want to start over or think about how many potential future side quests I've already ruined.

What ones are you talking about? I don't remember this in the game at all.

I can't remember, this was a year ago. I had 2 ruined because I visited places that are integral for these particular quests too early, therefore the game wouldn't give me credit for doing all of the steps in said quests. I googled the problem and it is definitely a thing, saw dozens of messages about this problem and people asking what to do about it. The answer is nothing, unfortunately.

Edit: I just googled "Witcher 3 side quest glitch" and tons of examples / complaints show up.
---

Amputation posted...

Never played 1 or 2. Played about 20 hours of 3. It was fun, but if you are a 100% completionist like me, the game is bugged to the point of unplayable (for the completionist): there are some sidequests that get ruined and are impossible to complete if you explore too much. Unacceptable for an open world game. I just quit because I didn't want to start over or think about how many potential future side quests I've already ruined.

As someone who's done every side quest and map icon shit and DLC, I have no idea what you're talking about. 160 hours, only glitches I've gotten were annoying horse riding ones.
---

Leanaunfurled posted...

Amputation posted...

Never played 1 or 2. Played about 20 hours of 3. It was fun, but if you are a 100% completionist like me, the game is bugged to the point of unplayable (for the completionist): there are some sidequests that get ruined and are impossible to complete if you explore too much. Unacceptable for an open world game. I just quit because I didn't want to start over or think about how many potential future side quests I've already ruined.

As someone who's done every side quest and map icon shit and DLC, I have no idea what you're talking about. 160 hours, only glitches I've gotten were annoying horse riding ones.

I recall the first sidequests that got messed up had something to do with going to a house to visit with the village's local hunter. Since I already went to his house many hours before the sudequest, the game wouldn't mark off that step as completed and wouldn't let me move to the next step of the quest.

I'll have to load up the game to remember the quest,,this was last year.
---