I never played the first two games (except for 5 minutes of the first one but the control scheme made me physically ill with disgust) and it all made perfect sense to me. I read virtually none of the glossary entries, either. I knew there was history because it was game 3 and the information presented to me in the quest lines did a good job of making me feel like I understood most of that history in some way.
It is true that the main story was a bit plain. Baron sidequest far more interesting as a story to tell. Strong emotions in the main story only arised when Ciri does a flashback in her memory to decide if she can handle the white frost or not.
Personally I enjoyed the political intrigues of The Witcher 2 far more than the poor guy Eredin and his company of losers. I really enjoyed fighting for a free Aedirn. (Also the soundtrack in Flotsam is so freakin' sexy)
From the Witcher 3 I enjoyed taking part in the scheme against Radovid who CDPR decided to turn into a complete lunatic, bad decision they took imho.
Personally I enjoyed the political intrigues of The Witcher 2 far more than the poor guy Eredin and his company of losers. I really enjoyed fighting for a free Aedirn. (Also the soundtrack in Flotsam is so freakin' sexy)
From the Witcher 3 I enjoyed taking part in the scheme against Radovid who CDPR decided to turn into a complete lunatic, bad decision they took imho.
You don't have to read the glossary, but you do need to have played or know about the first two games. It's continued from these two. It's called Witcher 3, not Witcher 1 for a reason. It is NOT a stand-alone game.
Actually, no. The first two games tell their own stories, and really good ones. Ciri doesn't even play a role in those.
Also, I agree, that the story of The Witcher 1 is the best CDPR told, but, you know, I cannot really recommend the game today.
It hasn't really aged well, the combat system is a mess, and overall it has a lot of flaws.... still, great plot!
Also, I agree, that the story of The Witcher 1 is the best CDPR told, but, you know, I cannot really recommend the game today.
It hasn't really aged well, the combat system is a mess, and overall it has a lot of flaws.... still, great plot!
Fair enough, but I had the opposite experience. Played Wild Hunt first, loved it, then tried out Witcher 2 and find myself trudging through it like a chore. The second game's all right, but I prefer the open world experience.
Also, I appreciate the fact that Wild Hunt tells a more personal story. I prefer that to the never-ending politics of Assassin of Kings.
Also, I appreciate the fact that Wild Hunt tells a more personal story. I prefer that to the never-ending politics of Assassin of Kings.
The gameplay is much stronger in Witcher 3, but Witcher 2's definitely got the best arrangement/presentation of plot and most meaningful player choices.
The thing about Witcher 2 is that you have to play it multiple times to truly understand its greatness, and I agree, requiring multiple plays can actually be seen as a weakness. When I first played Witcher 2, I remember being a bit disappointed after the beauty that Witcher 1 was. Almost a year later I decided to give it another go, and I totally fell in love with it. Now I have finished the game almost 10 times. It has a pretty complicated plot for a video game, and while one could argue it is even too complicated for a good experience, I still think it's the best I have ever seen.
It requires at least one go with both the Iorveth path and the Roche path. But even within those two you have a few choices that affect the outcome, thus require more playthroughs to understand everything.
Act 1 from Witcher 2 is probably my favourite act from any game. Just walking in Flotsam, listening to that beautiful music, is always a very relaxing experience for me.
I started reading the books and played both Witcher games before TW1+TW2 and i can guarantee that TW 3 lacks a lot in storytelling/lore and character development. It's still the best part of the trilogy for obvious reasons, technical reasons, better engine, sound, gameplay, combat, playtime length etc. etc.
TW1 and TW2 don't have that much impact on the story in TW3, so TW3 is nearly a standalone game. The choices you made in the previous games are meaningless in the third game. There are some choices that still count but i won't spoiler here anything.
TW3 is excellent, it's a masterpiece in the RPG genre and a shining star in the gaming industries, but the Wild Hunt plot and it's topics are neary not represant and the Wild Hunt bosses are without deeper characterization. The side characters are in my opinion much stronger personalitywise than the main antagonists.
Sounds like we have diametrically opposing opinions, then, because I actually think this is an example of a perfect game.
The storyline is great.
The characters are interesting.
The gameplay is fantastic.
Also, if you didn't like open world games, why did you get Witcher 3?
The storyline is great.
The characters are interesting.
The gameplay is fantastic.
Also, if you didn't like open world games, why did you get Witcher 3?
Didn't cross your mind that he may believed the lore could be as awesome as where the previous 2? Huh?
I respect your opinion but, for me, the esence of every RPG game is the story. A game is not a masterpiece only because of it's graphics or the gameplay, it could be a good game but not the best one. When I finished TW2 I was expecting an ending that would put the Witcher Saga above the Mass Effect games. Sadly, this didn't happen. Now I can say that I enjoyed more the Mass Effect games because their story is very much consistent through the three games even when they have been heavily criticised
Imo Witcher 2 and Witcher 3 are equally good. Both have different strenghts and weaknesses.
The most obvious strenght of Witcher 3 is the gameplay. The combat is basically a highly improved version of the Witcher 2 combat. For me personally the seconds biggest difference is the music. Witcher 2 was pretty unremarkable in this regard, while every single Wicther 3 song etched on my memory.
Witcher 2 on the other hand completely blows Witcher 3 off in terms of story. But to be fair, Witcher 2 has one of the best written stories I have ever experiences in the 15 years I'm playing video games. The witcher 3 story- while decently executed- is pretty mediocre. Reminds me of a typical Bioware power fantasy story.
In terms of characters, both games did an amazing job, except for the antagonists. Letho is on another level than Eredin.
Overall i would summarize it by saying that Witcher 2 was more adult and less mainstream than Witcher 3 regarding the narrative, but the improved gameplay and other aspects compensate for it.
The most obvious strenght of Witcher 3 is the gameplay. The combat is basically a highly improved version of the Witcher 2 combat. For me personally the seconds biggest difference is the music. Witcher 2 was pretty unremarkable in this regard, while every single Wicther 3 song etched on my memory.
Witcher 2 on the other hand completely blows Witcher 3 off in terms of story. But to be fair, Witcher 2 has one of the best written stories I have ever experiences in the 15 years I'm playing video games. The witcher 3 story- while decently executed- is pretty mediocre. Reminds me of a typical Bioware power fantasy story.
In terms of characters, both games did an amazing job, except for the antagonists. Letho is on another level than Eredin.
Overall i would summarize it by saying that Witcher 2 was more adult and less mainstream than Witcher 3 regarding the narrative, but the improved gameplay and other aspects compensate for it.
Last edited:
I agree with you on every single thing except for the music. My personal opinion is that The Witcher 1 has the best music I have ever heard in any video game. The Witcher 2's music was much more cinematic and not as good, but still very good. The Witcher 3 for me is the worst in terms of music. It's way too repetitve, especially for an open world game. You have to spend hours and hours in Novigrad doing all those quests and sometimes the music started really getting on my nerves. It has a riff of some six notes going on and on and on and on, with only the background and chords changing. It's well produced and sounds good, but please, too much of the same drives me nuts. I hear they've added more variety with patch 1.07, but so far I haven't been to Novigrad just yet.
Music in Skellige was very beautiful though.
Exactly that
I don't mind open world games. It's just not the one thing, that makes the world of the witcher great for me.---------- Updated at 09:40 PM ----------
Eredin was kinda lame. I mean, seriously, that guy is the big threat to the world? Well, if there is nothing worse..
---------- Updated at 10:21 PM ----------
Loved the mass effect games. Although, the whole idea of the story is "borrowed" by the novel "revelation space" from alistair reynolds.
It is somehow significant that one of the few good games stories is "borrowed" (without ever being referenced)
Last edited:
Exactly that
---------- Updated at 09:40 PM ----------
Eredin was kinda lame. I mean, seriously, that guy is the big threat to the world? Well, if there is nothing worse..
---------- Updated at 10:21 PM ----------
Loved the mass effect games. Although, the whole idea of the story is "borrowed" by the novel "revelation space" from alistair reynolds.
It is somehow significant that one of the few good games stories is "borrowed" (without ever being referenced)
So much of Mass Effect is borrowed from Babylon 5 as well.