It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Get the first one first.
I had to force myself to finish the first game, wasn't a fan of the gameplay mechanics at all. On the other hand I am now on my third playthrough of the second game and will do a fourth one after the combat rebalance mod. Storywise the game continues the political intrigues of the book series while the first game's plot is negligible when it comes to understanding the second.
avatar
hauskamies: I had to force myself to finish the first game, wasn't a fan of the gameplay mechanics at all. On the other hand I am now on my third playthrough of the second game and will do a fourth one after the combat rebalance mod. Storywise the game continues the political intrigues of the book series while the first game's plot is negligible when it comes to understanding the second.
I have to disagree for one reason: the first game is what really introduces players to the world if you've not read the books before, the second game does almost nothing of the sort. So while you can understand the story of the second game fully you'll not get a lot of things that are important. This also hurts some of the characters, for example you'll just have no idea who Zoltan or Dandelion is.
I tried to play the 1st one several times, but id find id get lost as to where i was supposed to go alot. Witcher 2 was alot less confusing as far as missions go.

The 2 games play very differently and dispite the trouble I've had with the 1st game I am downloading it as I type because it is enjoyable in the long run.

So yes, buy both games because they are worth it.
Post edited June 18, 2013 by Rassilon
TW1 is longer but most of that comes from "filler feeling" Walking to and fro the same place several chapters ( not quite a horrific Kirkwall though) with enemies respawing + an awkard combat to further lengthen it.

You should play it though as its story,characters,world are rich and fulfilling and make the experience in tw2 that much more richer. Not a whole lot carries over the save which would make those cameos count for even less if you didn't go through the story to begin with.

I would buy it. If the weird combat makes you rage quit then cheat and give yourself a win button just to experience the strong parts of it.


TW2 is the stronger game imo but its shorter because its more fine tuned and polished which is a real time trap for dev's I suppose.
witcher 1 is the better experience, but witcher 2 is much more polished, and definately has prettier visuals (though not necessarily artistic design)

if i could only pick one of the two games to play, it would be the first, hands down.
avatar
shivnz: witcher 1 is the better experience, but witcher 2 is much more polished, and definately has prettier visuals (though not necessarily artistic design)

if i could only pick one of the two games to play, it would be the first, hands down.
Witcher 2: The visuals have higher fidelity but horrible lighting, which means they look incredible flat and unpolished.

Furthermore witcher 2 suffers from many bugs that will stop from making any progress, the combat system is annoying, the input system seems to be broken by design, with unreliable mouse (mouse acceleration) and joypad inputs with heavy input lag.

I would say don´t bother with Witcher 2, just enjoy the slow paced but fantastic "The Witcher".
avatar
za.ch: Witcher 2: The visuals have higher fidelity but horrible lighting, which means they look incredible flat and unpolished.

Furthermore witcher 2 suffers from many bugs that will stop from making any progress, the combat system is annoying, the input system seems to be broken by design, with unreliable mouse (mouse acceleration) and joypad inputs with heavy input lag.

I would say don´t bother with Witcher 2, just enjoy the slow paced but fantastic "The Witcher".
^what he said.

If you want to play both, play W2 first, and then W1. Otherwise you'll find W2 crap and unplayable, then quit it and never look back. As it happened to me.

I suggest playing only W1.
avatar
samurai_zac: Is it possible just to skip the witcher 1 and go right into 2 or will I miss a lot of story?
You can play the Witcher 2 without playing 1, but you will need to open the journal and do a lot of reading. Even then, you will miss some of the flavour.

Personally, I enjoyed TW2 more than TW1, but YMMV. Still, both were fantastic. The games are different in many ways. The mechanics in TW1 are a bit old school for an RPG (not surprising as when the game came out, the old school was the "in" school). TW2 is more modern. TW1 had a deeper story and was a longer experience but the running around before getting to Vizima and the back and forth in the swamps was a bit boring, though somewhat expected of RPG's at that time. TW2 is beautiful and the gameplay experience is, IMO, much tighter, while the learning curve is unnecessarily steep.

If you can handle playing an older game, you should consider playing them both in order. However, if the older RPG experience is not for you, look up some of the "what came before" videos on YouTube and take a look at the Witcher wiki then jump into TW2. And read, read, read the journal!
avatar
samurai_zac: Is it possible just to skip the witcher 1 and go right into 2 or will I miss a lot of story?
avatar
Cymbeline: You can play the Witcher 2 without playing 1, but you will need to open the journal and do a lot of reading. Even then, you will miss some of the flavour.

Personally, I enjoyed TW2 more than TW1, but YMMV. Still, both were fantastic. The games are different in many ways. The mechanics in TW1 are a bit old school for an RPG (not surprising as when the game came out, the old school was the "in" school). TW2 is more modern. TW1 had a deeper story and was a longer experience but the running around before getting to Vizima and the back and forth in the swamps was a bit boring, though somewhat expected of RPG's at that time. TW2 is beautiful and the gameplay experience is, IMO, much tighter, while the learning curve is unnecessarily steep.

If you can handle playing an older game, you should consider playing them both in order. However, if the older RPG experience is not for you, look up some of the "what came before" videos on YouTube and take a look at the Witcher wiki then jump into TW2. And read, read, read the journal!
Ended up buying both in last weeks sale.
avatar
Cymbeline:
avatar
samurai_zac: Ended up buying both in last weeks sale.
You are in for many hours of fun! My hint on TW1 -- Don't give up on the game during the Prologue or the Outskirts of Vizima. It picks up when you get to Vizema. My hint for TW2 -- depending on your skill, knock it down to easy for the first part of the game. It actually gets easier once you are past the prologue and you can up it to normal if you want. AND, if you get to a certain first chapter boss and can't figure it out, look at a YouTube video. It was one of the few times that I thought the game cheated a bit.

Have fun!
avatar
samurai_zac: Is it possible just to skip the witcher 1 and go right into 2 or will I miss a lot of story?
Sure it's possible. If there's something that sounds like a reference, look it up. That's what I'm going to do. I have about 30 hrs into The Witcher, it's taken about 6-8 months to do that (I play a lot of games, spent 120 hrs in 2 or 3 weeks on a another series) simply because the game sucks so bad. The movement is annoying, the combat is dull and terribly done, there really is no strategy and it's all on skill points, almost no input from you. A lot of the character voicing is flat or weird. So many glitches in interacting with people. Most of the time is spent running around. Overall it honestly feels like they purposely made the game a pain in the ass solely to add to the game play time. The story seems like it has potential but I can't handle forcing myself to grit through anymore of the game.