Do you need to play Witcher 1 & 2 to enjoy Witcher 3?

The Witcher 3 has been on my backlog forever. Every time I play I find it hard to relate to the characters or know what's going on. Part of that is because I haven't played the previous games. Is it worth still playing, SW? Anyone here finish the game without playing the previous two? Did you enjoy it?

You could start with The Witcher 3, and you'd manage to grasp a general idea of what's going on.

But knowing what happens in the books and to a lesser extent in the two previous games greatly adds to the enjoyment of the story and to the understanding of the lore, of the world, of the characters and their motives. I said to a lesser extent in relation to the previous games because TW3 is more deeply tied to the events of the books than to the events of the last two games, and that's because it brings back a character who was absent from the old games, but was very important in the novels.

In other words, You don't necessarily need to play the previous two games, but W3 winks at you a lot expecting you to know what it's talking about. The in-game character bios are full and concise; they'll fill you in on what you missed. TW3 is and my personal favorite game this gen has to offer and I'm already in my 4th play as we speak. Best play on PC, this is NOT up for discussion.

Save games from the previous games can have an effect on the starting situation of the Witcher 3 but it's not essential to play them first. The first Witcher game is a very different beast from the last.

No, I played 3 first and went back after that. Sometimes the NPCs will talk about stuff you won't initially understand, but it's easy to pick up the gist of it. There are also well done Witcher summaries on youtube that detail the books and first two games if you really want to know what happened before 3.

I played TW3 first, recently started the 2nd. Although I thoroughly enjoyed the game, one of the best RPG games I ever played, I think I missed out on some deeper understanding of the story had I played the 2nd first. I remember watching a video that summarized important events from 2, however I would sometimes wonder if I should have played 2 before.

There are a lot of returning characters from 2 and although you can easily get acquainted with the main events of the 2nd game, sometimes there are some fine details of the character interactions which may seem less impactful to you since they allude to an event from the 2nd game.

So no you don't have to play 2 imo, but if you can I think it should enhance the experience with TW3 afterwards, some scenarios and dialogue sequences may carry more meaning to you, and even the overall storyline since you will have a better understanding of many of the characters.

At the very least you should play TW2 first. You'll get even more enjoyment out of the story and lore of TW3.

Witcher 2 should be played before W3. There are lot of characters from it that you meet in the third game, and they really come on their own if you have played W2 and thus know what they are about.

At the beginning of W3 you get to input info about the stuff that happened to you in W2, so you can tell the game which characters are still alive, and thus available in W3. Very handy. I loved this connection between W2 and W3.

Not really, although they do provide quite a bit of backstory.

Witcher 1 blows. I would just read the story on the wiki.

Witcher 2 was good though, but it's up to you if you want to play it or not (it sets up TW3 quite nicely both in terms of story and acquainting you with the combat).

It helps, you might like it even more if you play them, but it's not necessary. The story doesn't directly pick up where Witcher 2 left off, it moves time forward and focuses on a somewhat different plot path. There is a lot of time in-between games, and although the implications of Witcher 2 are directly influencing the world-building of 3, it isn't like you miss a plot point that's integral to understanding Witcher 3, by not playing 1 or 2. This sentiment is largely the same with the books. They expand your knowledge and give extra clarity to certain situations, but by no means are they mandatory for enjoyment.

No.

I agree. first one absolutely suck.

second one is ok.

third one is medicore.

such an overrated series witcher is. almost as overrated as mass effect.

TW3 and the Mass Effect series are among greatest RPGs of all time.

I'll bet you've never played any of them.

The best part about this is that you're a Metro fan, which has just 1 game in the series with a score over 90% on metacritic.

u wont enjoy witcher 3 even if u played both 1 and 2 lol so overrated.

lol again with score bullshit and obession with 90 on metacritic. hahah

most of best games are 80 on metacritic. enjoy your score while let us enjoy quality of games.

Couldn't really get into Witcher 1, hated the combat. Witcher 2 feels really clunky too, I might try to force myself to play it... just because I ****** love Witcher 3 and the second one is supposed to be really good.

There are probably a lot of references to the earlier games, but I still managed to get hooked almost instantly. OR because I got hooked so fast, I didn't really care... I just woke up, hard to... gather my thoughts... need coffee.

Skip 1, play 2, if you have the time read the books, imo that will give you the best experience with TW3.

Well I don't know much about the first 2 but I thoroughly enjoyed w3.

I never got the feeling that there was much (if any?) assumed knowledge of the first two installments.

I tried playing The Witcher 2 before and after the combat overhaul patch, and I just couldn't get into it.

You can easily skip TW 1&2 and jump straight into 3. I'd say a majority of people that played The Witcher 3 never played the previous two, going by how much it sold.

@SolidGame_basic: That's the road I went and I don't regret it, not one bit. It makes the game much more rich than if you went in blind. Which is fine, you don't have to play the previous ones, but I found it was well worth it.

Thankfully no, since the first game is terrible.

I have The Witcher: Enhanced Edition. Got bored with it. Skipped The Witcher 2. I have The Witcher 3. Got bored with it as well.

Once I recover from my boredom with 3rd-person games, I'll replay both. I occasionally get burned out with 1st-person games. But, I played 3rd-person games for a much longer time. So, the burn out is also much longer.

I'm sure you could. I made sure I played them on PC and carried save files over. I like personalized play throughs that it affords.

No. I haven’t played Witcher 1 & 2 yet but I consider Witcher 3 to be thoroughly enjoyable and one of the best games I’ve ever played.

The only thing you wont receive if you didnt transfer Witcher 2 save to Witcher 3 was the Squirrel tattoo Ves gave to Geralt during Act 1. And the neck tattoo is optional and skipable.

Nope if you can keep up with its shallow gameplay ^^