TW1 before the TW2?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by NaveedLife (17179 posts) -

I know I have asked this before, but I need to see a poll result to make a decision :P. I just cannot get into The Witcher 1 (combat is boring so far), but TW2 looks amazing. I am a big story whore, so I feel the need to play all predecessors to a game I am going to play. I played MGS1-4 in order for the first time 3 years ago, same with God of War and other games. So is it necessary for someone like this to play TW1 before TW2?

PS - how long is TW1?

#2 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4117 posts) -
Where are you in TW1? The game doesn't get good until Chapter 2. I highly recommend both games and while you don't need to play TW1 first, you will understand some references in TW2 if you do.
#3 Posted by NaveedLife (17179 posts) -

Where are you in TW1? The game doesn't get good until Chapter 2. I highly recommend both games and while you don't need to play TW1 first, you will understand some references in TW2 if you do. Toxic-Seahorse

Right, that seems to be what I hear most of the time. It is enough to make me feel bad if I skipped right to 2 :P.

I am in chapter 2 I think. Beat the whole opening thing in the Witchers hideout/castle area and am wandering around some village now looking to light beacons or something. it has been awhile :P. I think a priest gave me some candles to put in shrines.

#4 Posted by cfstar (1979 posts) -
I played The Witcher 2 first and I did just fine, so no, you don't have to play TW1. However, I did understood somethings that went right over my head the first time in TW2 after I played 1.
#5 Posted by Im_single (5134 posts) -
You beat the prologue. You are on chapter 1. And you don't need to play TW1 to play TW2. I personally love TW1, probably a bit more than I like TW2. I know I'm not the norm but I found the story to be much better for TW1. But if you can't stand playing it (Which I can totally understand) I see no problem with moving onto TW2. You may be a bit lost at first, and some characters will not be as familiar but you should be OK. At worst you could just read up on what happened in TW1 and raed the character bios before heading into TW2.
#6 Posted by Planeforger (15526 posts) -

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]Where are you in TW1? The game doesn't get good until Chapter 2. I highly recommend both games and while you don't need to play TW1 first, you will understand some references in TW2 if you do. NaveedLife

Right, that seems to be what I hear most of the time. It is enough to make me feel bad if I skipped right to 2 :P.

I am in chapter 2 I think. Beat the whole opening thing in the Witchers hideout/castle area and am wandering around some village now looking to light beacons or something. it has been awhile :P. I think a priest gave me some candles to put in shrines.

That's only Chapter One - the first chapter was the Prologue.

Anyway, The Witcher 2's plot works fine as a stand-alone story, but you'll miss a lot of the background information about Geralt, his friends, and the world around him. The first game also sets up most of the mysteries that the second game deals with, and a lot of your choices from the first are mentioned in TW2 (plus all of your equipment carries over), so...you'd get the most out of the series if you play them in order.

Still, the first game is about 50 hours long, so if you're really disliking it during the next chapter or so...

#7 Posted by call_of_duty_10 (4954 posts) -

If you care about the story,then you should definitely play Witcher 1.

TW1 has much better story,environments and characters as compared to TW2.The fun starts from chapter 2.

#8 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -
TW1 shouldn't be missed if you want to invest any time in The Witcher series. It starts out slow but it picks up wind after the first few chapters. I actually liked TW1 a lot more than TW2.
#9 Posted by sleepingzzz (2260 posts) -

I tried to finish the Witcher 1 three seperate times over the years after each of the major updates. Could never do it. The click click fighting is just too awful for me. I got to the begining of chapter 3 just because so many people say it gets good. For me it didn't. I actually hated the game more at that point.

The Witcher 2 on the other hand is much better. Actually, it's one of the best RPGs I've played so don't miss out on the Witcher 2. You're not missing that much from the story. If you want to really get into the story then read the books. Fan translations have finish the whole series. The stories in the book are a million times better than the games.

#10 Posted by cain006 (8625 posts) -

I'd say skip it. From what I hear the save import feature in Witcher 2 is bad. On top of that, I thought The Witcher was a pretty bad game.

And don't listen to the people who say chapter 2 is better than 1. 2 was horrible because of the extremely boring fetch quest at the beginning. The crime part was definitely fun, but the game is horribly paced and has crappy fetch quests.

#11 Posted by NaveedLife (17179 posts) -

[QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]Where are you in TW1? The game doesn't get good until Chapter 2. I highly recommend both games and while you don't need to play TW1 first, you will understand some references in TW2 if you do. Planeforger

Right, that seems to be what I hear most of the time. It is enough to make me feel bad if I skipped right to 2 :P.

I am in chapter 2 I think. Beat the whole opening thing in the Witchers hideout/castle area and am wandering around some village now looking to light beacons or something. it has been awhile :P. I think a priest gave me some candles to put in shrines.

That's only Chapter One - the first chapter was the Prologue.

Anyway, The Witcher 2's plot works fine as a stand-alone story, but you'll miss a lot of the background information about Geralt, his friends, and the world around him. The first game also sets up most of the mysteries that the second game deals with, and a lot of your choices from the first are mentioned in TW2 (plus all of your equipment carries over), so...you'd get the most out of the series if you play them in order.

Still, the first game is about 50 hours long, so if you're really disliking it during the next chapter or so...

Well does the combat get any better? So far it feels like it is impossible for me to dodge attacks, at which pt it becomes runescape, but instead of watching you have to click in perfect timing all the time. I just dont like it. The rest of the game may be great, I have not gotten far enough to judge.

#12 Posted by NaveedLife (17179 posts) -

I tried to finish the Witcher 1 three seperate times over the years after each of the major updates. Could never do it. The click click fighting is just too awful for me. I got to the begining of chapter 3 just because so many people say it gets good. For me it didn't. I actually hated the game more at that point.

The Witcher 2 on the other hand is much better. Actually, it's one of the best RPGs I've played so don't miss out on the Witcher 2. You're not missing that much from the story. If you want to really get into the story then read the books. Fan translations have finish the whole series. The stories in the book are a million times better than the games.

sleepingzzz

Cannot say I am a big reader, so I probably will never do that :P, but I am glad you agree about the combat. I saw GS saying it was great, played it and thought...this is good combat?

#13 Posted by Toxic-Seahorse (4117 posts) -

[QUOTE="Toxic-Seahorse"]Where are you in TW1? The game doesn't get good until Chapter 2. I highly recommend both games and while you don't need to play TW1 first, you will understand some references in TW2 if you do. NaveedLife

Right, that seems to be what I hear most of the time. It is enough to make me feel bad if I skipped right to 2 :P.

I am in chapter 2 I think. Beat the whole opening thing in the Witchers hideout/castle area and am wandering around some village now looking to light beacons or something. it has been awhile :P. I think a priest gave me some candles to put in shrines.

That's chapter 1. The Witcher castle is just a tutorial/prologue. Chapter 1 blows.
#14 Posted by with_teeth26 (6053 posts) -

Witcher 1 gets off to a slow start and drags at times during Chapter 2, but its a rich and compelling game well worth playing through.

#15 Posted by JangoWuzHere (16087 posts) -

Still never got all the hate for The Witcher 1's combat. The combat gets more and more fun as you level up and unlock new ability's. It's pretty simple at the start, but it gets a lot more complex in the middle and the end.

#16 Posted by cain006 (8625 posts) -

[QUOTE="Planeforger"]

[QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

Right, that seems to be what I hear most of the time. It is enough to make me feel bad if I skipped right to 2 :P.

I am in chapter 2 I think. Beat the whole opening thing in the Witchers hideout/castle area and am wandering around some village now looking to light beacons or something. it has been awhile :P. I think a priest gave me some candles to put in shrines.

NaveedLife

That's only Chapter One - the first chapter was the Prologue.

Anyway, The Witcher 2's plot works fine as a stand-alone story, but you'll miss a lot of the background information about Geralt, his friends, and the world around him. The first game also sets up most of the mysteries that the second game deals with, and a lot of your choices from the first are mentioned in TW2 (plus all of your equipment carries over), so...you'd get the most out of the series if you play them in order.

Still, the first game is about 50 hours long, so if you're really disliking it during the next chapter or so...

Well does the combat get any better? So far it feels like it is impossible for me to dodge attacks, at which pt it becomes runescape, but instead of watching you have to click in perfect timing all the time. I just dont like it. The rest of the game may be great, I have not gotten far enough to judge.

If you don't like the timing and whatnot you won't ever like the combat, because it's based on that.

#17 Posted by Prexxus (1443 posts) -

I think I enjoyed the first game more then the second so. If it was up to me yeah. I LOVED the first game I think I beat it atleast 4 times.

#18 Posted by II-Siamak-II (463 posts) -

Let me tell you about my experience, it took me almost 8 tries to get into The Witcher 1, and I always quite right after act 1, but on my last try I forced my self to keep playing and let me tell you, as soon as I finished Act 2 I was so hooked into the game and story that I could not put the game down, it was an Amazing journey and one of the most epic adventures I had, put around 80 hours in that game without realizing it, you defentely should play through the epic adventure of The Witcher 1 before starting the sequel. I know it might feel uninteresting and outdated at first but try to finish at least act 2 and see where it takes you ma man.

#19 Posted by DanielDust (15402 posts) -

Still never got all the hate for The Witcher 1's combat. The combat gets more and more fun as you level up and unlock new ability's. It's pretty simple at the start, but it gets a lot more complex in the middle and the end.

JangoWuzHere

Nah, it's bad, you get used to it since the game is good and it gets fun for that reason, but I never finished the Witcher 1, had about 2 more hours to play, came back after 3 months and I just couldn't stand the combat.To complete the game, it's worth ignoring this one and only major flaw, for a few hours, there's youtube.

Everything becomes bearable when you have to deal with it.

#20 Posted by kieran88 (2273 posts) -
100% yes! Play TW1 first, the gameplay isn't great but the story is. It also sets up the world nicely and you'll know most of the big characters for the second. You'll also want to find out the kingslayer conspiracy, whereas this will be somewhat lost on you if you just dive into part 2.
#21 Posted by JangoWuzHere (16087 posts) -

[QUOTE="JangoWuzHere"]

Still never got all the hate for The Witcher 1's combat. The combat gets more and more fun as you level up and unlock new ability's. It's pretty simple at the start, but it gets a lot more complex in the middle and the end.

DanielDust

Nah, it's bad,

Nah, it's good.

#22 Posted by kieran88 (2273 posts) -

-----------------
derp

#23 Posted by DanielDust (15402 posts) -
[QUOTE="JangoWuzHere"]

[QUOTE="DanielDust"] Nah, it's bad,

kieran88

Nah, it's good.

Agreed. Easily one of the best rpgs I've played.

If you actually read, it's about combat which is pretty much part of the gameplay that you said "isn't great", so which is it, you're contradicting yourself (I'll ignore the poster quoting me since it's not worth it). Combat is bad, it's no mistery.
#24 Posted by kieran88 (2273 posts) -
[QUOTE="kieran88"][QUOTE="JangoWuzHere"]

Nah, it's good.

DanielDust
Agreed. Easily one of the best rpgs I've played.

If you actually read, it's about combat which is pretty much part of the gameplay that you said "isn't great", so which is it, you're contradicting yourself (I'll ignore the poster quoting me since it's not worth it). Combat is bad, it's no mistery.

My mistake, agreed the combat isn't great. Will edit post.
#25 Posted by xWoW_Rougex (2755 posts) -

I gotta say I didn't feel that confused when playing TW2... I really enjoyed it and I never felt lost even though I hadn't played TW1. I've tried to get through TW1 though but never managed, not that it's a bad game or anything, well... except for how there's no "walk" button. That's so 1980.


I mostly came here to say that there's one book that's translated in english and it's definitely worth a read! As I played TW1, I kept thinking like "What would the actual Geralt character think of this?" because TW the games are all about making choices and after reading the book, it definitely feels as if many of these choices are things Geralt wouldn't really agree to.
Basically what I am saying is, if you want story, try the book instead, it adds a lot of food for the thought when actually playing the games in my opinion.

#26 Posted by kieran88 (2273 posts) -

I gotta say I didn't feel that confused when playing TW2... I really enjoyed it and I never felt lost even though I hadn't played TW1. I've tried to get through TW1 though but never managed, not that it's a bad game or anything, well... except for how there's no "walk" button. That's so 1980.


I mostly came here to say that there's one book that's translated in english and it's definitely worth a read! As I played TW1, I kept thinking like "What would the actual Geralt character think of this?" because TW the games are all about making choices and after reading the book, it definitely feels as if many of these choices are things Geralt wouldn't really agree to.
Basically what I am saying is, if you want story, try the book instead, it adds a lot of food for the thought when actually playing the games in my opinion.

xWoW_Rougex
True you wont be completely lost playing 2 without playing 1, but some of the story will lose its impact if you don't already know/ care about certain characters. Also, agreed, definitely worth checking out the book(s). There's 2 in english now - tho' one is a collection of short stories.
#27 Posted by xWoW_Rougex (2755 posts) -

[QUOTE="xWoW_Rougex"]

Also, agreed, definitely worth checking out the book(s). There's 2 in english now - tho' one is a collection of short stories.kieran88



It's actually the short story collection I was refering to! I never read the other book because it's part 1 of a saga that's probably gonna take about ten years to translate in this pace! :(


#28 Posted by kieran88 (2273 posts) -

[QUOTE="kieran88"][QUOTE="xWoW_Rougex"]

Also, agreed, definitely worth checking out the book(s). There's 2 in english now - tho' one is a collection of short stories.xWoW_Rougex



It's actually the short story collection I was refering to! I never read the other book because it's part 1 of a saga that's probably gonna take about ten years to translate in this pace! :(


Officialy yeah, but if you head over to the forums for TW2 you'll find the entire collection translated by fans :D I've yet to read any of the fan translations but they're supposedly of high quality.
#29 Posted by bonafidetk (3820 posts) -

I tried to finish the Witcher 1 three seperate times over the years after each of the major updates. Could never do it. The click click fighting is just too awful for me. I got to the begining of chapter 3 just because so many people say it gets good. For me it didn't. I actually hated the game more at that point.

The Witcher 2 on the other hand is much better. Actually, it's one of the best RPGs I've played so don't miss out on the Witcher 2. You're not missing that much from the story. If you want to really get into the story then read the books. Fan translations have finish the whole series. The stories in the book are a million times better than the games.

sleepingzzz
Same. I tried to play TW1 three times before I finally got sucked in. Took me a good 60hrs to finish it in the end. I thought it was great.
#30 Posted by guynamedbilly (12950 posts) -

I don't really think so. The Witcher's story does have some interesting and surprising revelations that you wouldn't really understand if you hadn't seen it, but The Witcher 2's story is mostly separated from it so that the story tying them together doesn't matter that much in the overall picture.

If the story and sidestories and characters aren't enough good things to override your displeasure of the combat, you should probably skip it and play the sequel.

My suggestion for anyone playing the first game though, skip all sidequests that look like they are just fetch quests. They rarely ever give a decent reward, and they are just simple fetch quests, without any substantial development. That was my major problem with the first game. The sidequests are kinda crap.

#31 Posted by Barbariser (6724 posts) -

I've played both games. Assassins of Kings has a completely different plot from The Witcher that is only peripherally related, you wouldn't be completely lost if you only played the second game but some background references may fly over your head.