If you have played the 1st 2 games you'll be completely lost.

[djkoz78]

If you have played the 1st 2 games you'll be completely lost.

I read an intereview with i guess the head of cd projekt red and what I was mainly reading for was if you bought The Witcher 3 did you need to play the first 2 games to understand what was going on? In his interview he CLEARLY stated that NO you don't have to play those games to understand the story bc its a standalone title. I have never had the money to be able to afford a gaming PC. Needless to say he clearly said this horse crap just to get new players to buy the game. Because I HAVE NO IDEA WTF is going on. I don't know any of the characters there's no background story of what's happened up until it begins in the game. It basically has thrown me into a world of confusion and so far I couldn't careless about the characters bc I don't have a clue about who they are what's happened in the past why they are looking for Yennifer, then a character asks me these questions from the previous games and I'm just randomly selecting answers to questions that make no sense. For ANY new gamers to this game take my word if your expecting any background or to know what's going on you've been duped just as I have. Returning the game for a refund.

 

[Amioran]

Is it too difficult for you to read a bit in the wikia to understand the context? It is not that it takes days of reading. Just to say.

 

[Ashwind123]

I can understand that if TW3 is your 1st witcher... there is a lot to take in and it can be confusing.

I hope that CDPR remake TW1 (especially) and TW2 with this new engine and launch a trilogy... maybe too expensive and not profitable but I can keep wishing.

Until that happens, if you dont want to buy, cannot afford or simply dont want to play the previous games - I suggest watching some Let's play on youtube to catch up a bit on the story.

 

[Bellator Pius Gratus]

No, you don't need to, but you're in for a treat if you do, they are really great games. :happy:

To bad you've decided already as you're missing out. I remember when installing Witcher 1 and reading the short story of Sapkowksi you got with the Enhanced edition. I had never heard of Sapkowski before and at first thought it was some ambitious marketing thing, writing a short story to advertise the game. Boy, was I in for a surprise. :happy:

There are a lot of book references in the games. Have I ever felt cheated or lost because I had yet to read the books being referenced when playing the games? Not a chance.

 

[djkoz78]

I would love to play the 1st two games but after reading his interview and he said that if you were new to the story then anyone could pick it up and not be lost and play it as its own storyline. LIE. If they remake the other games which would've been awesome then I wouldn't be warning anyone who was duped as I was.

 

[MooseOnFire]

I'd stick with it. I'm sure the plot will unfold and make more sense as you go, and if not, you can get a decent recap of the previous games on Wikipedia. Make sure to read the character notes in game as they unlock, too. You can choose not to incorporate choices from Witcher 2 when you start your playthrough (not much help now , I realise, unless you want to restart). Note that Ciri and Yennefer didn't physically appear in the previous two games; these contained only some fairly brief backstory about both, which again can be found online.

 

[TheSmoxed]

I never played a witcher before and it's no problem for me.
Because of the conversations it's clear that he has some connections to some characters. Indeed it would be interesting to know what this connection is, but it's not necessary to enjoy and complete the game. If you listen carefully, you can imagine what kind of connection that is.

 

[evolvegary]

I'm a badass with two swords and some magic tricks up my sleeve. There be monsters. Kill said monsters. Rinse and repeat....

Seriously though, I'm going to bring myself up to speed on the story somehow.

 

[SystemShock7]

If you played the first 2 games, yes, there is a connection and familiarity to the old characters and the story itself. If you have not played the first 2, read the journal entries for the characters and quests. They will tell you what is going on.

 

[kaltorakh]

You don't need to have played the first games.... you need to have read the books or at least a recap of the books.

At the start of he first game, Geralt looses his memory, and at the end of the second game, he recovers it. So those 2 games are like separate stories. The third game is a continuation of the books.

I read the books long ago, and I still watched/read some recap of the books. That helps a lot. Just search google. In 20 minutes you can have an understanding. As long as you understand Ciri and Yennefer backgrounds, and how Witchers work in this world, you are all set.

 

[TheMorbidAtheist]

I read an intereview with i guess the head of cd projekt red and what I was mainly reading for was if you bought The Witcher 3 did you need to play the first 2 games to understand what was going on? In his interview he CLEARLY stated that NO you don't have to play those games to understand the story bc its a standalone title. I have never had the money to be able to afford a gaming PC. Needless to say he clearly said this horse crap just to get new players to buy the game. Because I HAVE NO IDEA WTF is going on. I don't know any of the characters there's no background story of what's happened up until it begins in the game. It basically has thrown me into a world of confusion and so far I couldn't careless about the characters bc I don't have a clue about who they are what's happened in the past why they are looking for Yennifer, then a character asks me these questions from the previous games and I'm just randomly selecting answers to questions that make no sense. For ANY new gamers to this game take my word if your expecting any background or to know what's going on you've been duped just as I have. Returning the game for a refund.

There is Wiki, there are books,there are Youtube Gameplay videos and these forums have been around for a decade.
This game was announced back in February of 2013.
That is all.

 

[cyberpunkforever]

it's pretty obvious that if you haven't played previous games you will have no idea what's going on, so play them

 

[la_verne]

even without playing the first 2 games, there are some books in-game that actually tell you stories and hints about the previous titles. and some even contain info from the books that Sapkowski wrote. The journals are also providing a whole lot of info about characters you meet.

if one needs a deeper understanding of the background story, look up the wiki for witcher 3, iit is 1 or 2 clicks away if one is not too lazy to look. it will take just one sitting to sift through it all.

i find it unjust that you encourage others to not buy this game just because you personally weren't able to understand what is going on in the game. it is true that witcher might be a bit much to take in for those new to the series, but a little research and patience is enough to help a newcomer. this game is rich in lore and has plenty of characters that are vibrant and complex. it is unfortunate that you haven't and will not be experiencing the beautiful and heartbreaking stories that sapkowski and CDPR has given us.

here's to hoping your next game won't "dupe" you. cheers mate.

 

[CastorKrieg]

I would love to play the 1st two games but after reading his interview and he said that if you were new to the story then anyone could pick it up and not be lost and play it as its own storyline. LIE. If they remake the other games which would've been awesome then I wouldn't be warning anyone who was duped as I was.

This happens all the time, and people should not be surprised. The game isn't for you then, sorry. People had plenty of time to play W1/W2, read on the lore, the books, etc. First response nails it - it doesn't take days of reading. Seems you want not to like the game. By all means, take it back for a refund. Meanwhile rest of us will continue to play one of the best RPGs ever.

 

[mecha_fish]

guys, the OPs problem is that it was advertised that the player did not need to know anything in order to play the game

this person's experience has proven otherwise

i'm sorry that they didn't get that element quite right this time 'round. i would recommend reading up a bit because honestly, it's a fantastic rendition of the universe sapowski envisioned.

i did notice things like how Geralt and Triss talk to each other when they first meet up shows that there's loads of character stuff implied and not explained straight away. if someone paid a lot of attention to the details and name drops earlier in the game, they *might* be able to piece together the complexity of their relationship, but honestly even though i know the backstory etc. even i noticed the levels of implied information for that first meeting.

i love it from a person who's into the whole sapowski implied 'show dont tell' sort of thing, but i can see it'd suck for someone who had no idea this is how the storytelling works.

 

[CastorKrieg]

guys, the OPs problem is that it was advertised that the player did not need to know anything in order to play the game

That is never the case everytime a game has '2', '3', or whichever number next to its name, unless it's Final Fantasy. It was clear the game is a third game set in the world of the Witcher, it is also a direct continuation of Witcher 2.

 

[kingjosh1876]

This is the problem with the gaming industry, people expect to jump into a game at the end of a story driven series and understand everything. Would you jump into the third book in a fantasy series and then complain you don't understand the story? I know they advertised somewhat that you could enjoy the story without the first two games, but even so there will be some things you don't quite understand.

People seem to think of games as being past their time, you can only play them when they are brand new. Is this because of obsession over graphics? It's pretty silly to pick up the third iteration in a series without going through the previous two in my opinion. Developers should be able to focus on creating the best story possible to continue a series, not having to cater to re-explain the whole story to create a wider target audience who can't be bothered to play older games, as though thinking them obsolete.

The same problem might happen with Metal Gear Solid V. Loads of people will jump in and say they don't get the story, because they didn't bother with the previous games in the series.

 

[templar1980]

This is my first witcher game and I know exactly what is going on. If you want to get a feel for who the people are in game I suggest that you talk to absolutely everyone you can, listen to what they say and don;t skip the dialogue, and read all the books and notes you can get your hands on. The history and lore is there in spades but its not spoon feed to you.

 

[mecha_fish]

That is never the case everytime a game has '2', '3', or whichever number next to its name, unless it's Final Fantasy. It was clear the game is a third game set in the world of the Witcher, it is also a direct continuation of Witcher 2.

It is this case with this game, mate. The developers said multitudes of times that the game was designed to be accessible to players who had never experienced the witcher before. They even changes the logo design for the purpose of removing the great big 3, they refer to it as "Witcher: Wild Hunt" in most spoken advertising (see the gameplay trailer) and i'm sure you can find articles about where they discuss this in depth. they do talk about it in the gamespot videos to some extent.

whether they succeeded in making the game standalone for new players or not -- that's a different story all together. they intended for this game to be able to be accessed stand alone and according to this OP, they failed.

 

[Herbert2]

I wondered why cdpr said this. W1+2 are full with lore and Story that are critical to understand whats going on.