As the title reads, can you just play the 3rd one and still understand the plot and setting in the Witcher universe without playing The Witcher 1 and 2?
Poll: No Spoilers please, Is The Witcher 3 a game you can play without first playing 1 and 2?
- Thread starter Golden_Gundam
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'd say yes, just make sure if you start the game to select "no" for the "simulate Witcher 2 save" option.
To explain a little more, you will be lost as to who a few people are. Hell, I've played all of the first and most of the second and I'd completely forgotten as to who the hell anyone is. The game does a great job at explaining who's whom, you just have to talk to as many people as possible and pay attention. The plot is pretty standalone too, using little to none of the previous games plots.
To explain a little more, you will be lost as to who a few people are. Hell, I've played all of the first and most of the second and I'd completely forgotten as to who the hell anyone is. The game does a great job at explaining who's whom, you just have to talk to as many people as possible and pay attention. The plot is pretty standalone too, using little to none of the previous games plots.
Well, for one thing, the most enjoyable aspect of W3 are the side quests and the little stories they tell. Also, the (physical) game comes with a little booklet explaining who the major players are and most of the world.
I didn't play either of the previous games, and I had little trouble following what was going on.
I didn't play either of the previous games, and I had little trouble following what was going on.
I never played the first game, I did play the second but that game confused me so I remember nothing about the story. I was worried the same would happen with 3 but thankfully it does a great job at explaining everything. So yes, you can miss out on the first two game and still follow all the stuff in the third.
In TW3 there are no choices relating to TW1 that will effect TW3. I would suggest playing TW2 first at the very least as it will provide the character background that you'll encounter in TW3.
But seriously, why in hell play a game that's third in the series without playing the previous ones? It's not like the over-arching plot changes, there hasn't been any major gameplay changes nor are the previous games expensive. The "fanboy" or "nerd" within me is tell me to play TW1 then 2 and then 3.
This is not like TV where you can stumble into a TV show 4 seasons in and claim that you like it.
But seriously, why in hell play a game that's third in the series without playing the previous ones? It's not like the over-arching plot changes, there hasn't been any major gameplay changes nor are the previous games expensive. The "fanboy" or "nerd" within me is tell me to play TW1 then 2 and then 3.
This is not like TV where you can stumble into a TV show 4 seasons in and claim that you like it.
You should at least play the second game first since it's a pretty good game and hasn't aged as much as the first one. But if you don't feel like it then thats not really a problem. I recognized only a handfull of characters even though i played the previous game.
You can watch about 10 minutes of plot summaries of the previous games on YouTube and you'll be fine. Just pay attention in game and make use of the in-game character glossary to help fill you in on characters you might not recognize. From the very first Witcher game it throws you into the deep end in terms of you having a lot of friends/enemies from the books, so unless you're dedicated to reading a lengthy series of novels and playing through two large CRPGs, there's little point in trying to be completely caught up.
If you do decide to play a previous game, stick to Witcher 2. Witcher 1 is pretty wobbly now, and won't do anything to endear you to the series, unless your tolerance level for fussy retro gaming is exceptionally high.
If you do decide to play a previous game, stick to Witcher 2. Witcher 1 is pretty wobbly now, and won't do anything to endear you to the series, unless your tolerance level for fussy retro gaming is exceptionally high.
You'll be fine. Pretty much any questions you have about characters you run into can be summarized by reading their character entry, and anything else just read a wiki.
Truth is i have played half of the Witcher 1, however i have these breaks from it due to the battle system. I prefer the system of 2 and 3. That is why. I want to get three because of the story, and to see if the console port is better and finishing it will most likely motivate me to finish the first one. (i have 1 and 2 on steam and want 3 for ps4)kasperbbs said:
I will look into it, a few people have recommended the books. Are they just to fill in missing unknown elements of the games or do they progress the story? Also has anyone played the board game?Burned Hand said:
All of the books are set years before the games. They are invaluable if you want to know who's who in the game, much more than the previous installments.Golden_Gundam said:
That said, given Geralt's convenient amnesia in Witcher 1 and 2, these games don't actually give you a lot of info you have to keep track of. Witcher 3 is actually a much better starting point in my opinion, featuring as it does some major characters in the IP (Yennefer and Ciri) that were so far absent.
The exception, of course, are characters and events exclusive to the games. But a 10 min Youtube recap is more than enough to put you on track.
You can always do a Witcher trilogy marathon in the future, in case you grow to love the series.
Yes you could just play TW3, but you will enjoy it more if you play the others first. At the very least, you should play TW2.
Lots of people don't like TW1. I've seen lots of comments from people who played a few hours and then quit. I really enjoyed the game when it was new, I played it again this year and I will admit it hasn't aged very well.
TW2 was an amazing game when it was new, and its still an amazing game. If TW2 released in 2015 it would still be in the top10 games of the year.
Both games took me 30 hours to finish.
Lots of people don't like TW1. I've seen lots of comments from people who played a few hours and then quit. I really enjoyed the game when it was new, I played it again this year and I will admit it hasn't aged very well.
TW2 was an amazing game when it was new, and its still an amazing game. If TW2 released in 2015 it would still be in the top10 games of the year.
Both games took me 30 hours to finish.
Why would what i said make you cringe? im new to the series and most gaming novels are ether prequels or just non canon material so why is that cringe worthy to ask?G00N3R7883 said:
To Gundam GP01
Because someone had told me or i read somewhere that it was based on a board game, this was before you sent the link that i found that there are 7 English translations books available(i researched before you posted the link). I just don't understand why someone can't play a game to get into a series?. To use your example even though i know The Lord of the rings movie's are different to the canon material i still like them.I don't get your anger, sorry, i admitted i didn't do my research prior to this discussion.
Because someone had told me or i read somewhere that it was based on a board game, this was before you sent the link that i found that there are 7 English translations books available(i researched before you posted the link). I just don't understand why someone can't play a game to get into a series?. To use your example even though i know The Lord of the rings movie's are different to the canon material i still like them.I don't get your anger, sorry, i admitted i didn't do my research prior to this discussion.
