I don't know if this has been discussed (probably has), but there are significant inconsistencies with Witcher 1:

1) Importing the game and decisions you make in the first have virtually no influence. There is barely any mention. Not that the game is not branched enough as it is.

In regard to this, a bug: Foltest admits you saved his daughter (that's what I did) but then I find a book where it says she had to be killed in the previous game. This needs patching :D

2) The biggest inconsistency is in regard to Yennefer : she is largely present in the first game where she is a young doctor (! there are big choices regarding her too !). In witcher 2, it is assumed that never happened.

3) What happened to all the stuff from the first game, with the knights of the Flaming Rose and the kid who went back in time, ending up as their evil leader :D ? I think there are unfinished aspects and it feels Witcher 1 was just forgotten.


I kept my silver sword (Aerondight or something) thinking there may yet be some significance to it. It would have been nice if that item could at least level up with my witcher. After all, that thing was a lot more powerful in concept than most of the things we find in W2. Lol you find one of the best silver swords in a trash pile at the beginning of chapter 3 :))
Just saying, for players of Witcher 1 there should have been a way for your equipment to remain consistent.

EDIT: elysisone noticed I mixed Yennefer and Shani - that makes (2) invalid, but Shani is still an odd character, given the Witcher 2 story.

1. Could be. I do not have a savegame.
2. The young doctor in the first game was Shani, not Yennefer.
3. About the Maestre of the Flaming rose he is dead, and you will hear some references about him trough the game. Later in the game, in act 3, you will meet knights of the flaming rose.

1. One decision imported from TW1 does make a substantive difference in Act III (the other just gets mention in Acts I and II).

2. That's Shani, and the lack of continuity (neither appearance nor mention) with her character is the only disturbing one.

3. The Order is well covered in Act III.

The items that do get imported have to be nerfed. With anything remotely like their original stats, they would unbalance the game intolerably. This game doesn't implement level-up-with-you weapons or armor.

:D Sorry,I mixed the names. Still, Triss was been pretty mad with my choice, don't know how that makes sense at the start of Witcher 2. My point: Nothing from the first game matters.

I still find it odd that Shani had something to do with Geralt's healing, or do I remember that wrong ? That doesn't make a lot of sense in context with him dissapearing and the Wild Hunt.

I guess events from W2 will matter now, there will probably be expansions or a sequel that will draw on your choices significantly. What is that? :P

You seem generally confused about the plot, so maybe you should check out the story of the first game again, and pay more attention to the dialogue and the flashbacks of the second. ;) (Shani did not help heal Geralt recover; they are old acquaintances and met in Brenna, but since then they haven't had any time together; when they bump into each other in the Outskirts, in TW1, it's the first time they meet in years, and she had nothing to do with his recovery. Everything else involving Geralt's disappearance and reappearance is explained in the second game, so that's why I advise you to pay more attention - basically, Ciri helped Geralt and Yennefer after their assumed demise during the Rivia massacre. A lot of things happen after that - told through flashbacks during the story of TW2 - and eventually Geralt manages to get back to Kaer Morhen, where he is nursed back to health by Triss.)

In any case, there are only two plot states that are imported from TW1 into TW2. The first is which faction you sided with at the end of Chapter IV; the Order, or the Scoia'tael, or if you remained neutral. While this plot state mainly affects some banter dialogue and a couple of conversations here and there, you start noticing some things better in the third act. Again, neither makes a big difference, but they are still nice flavour events that I appreciate.

The second plot state is whether Adda is dead or alive. If she is alive, she is married to King Radovid of Redania, which mostly affects the political climate behind the scenes, which we don't get to take part in very much - although it may or may not have a more significant impact on the conversations throughout the game (again, especially in Act 3), depending on which storyline you follow.

I agree it is a bit disappointing that there are no more of your choices imported, but if it's a sacrifice they had to make in order to turn TW2 into the extremely well-written and intricately woven tapestry of brilliant story-telling that it is, it's a price I'll gladly pay.

People think it is easy making branching game and then making sequel that supports all those branches. No, it is pretty much impossible due to time/money/people constraints.

Eventually, you have to pick a "canon" branch and stick with it, otherwise you will never finish any sequel.

If you sided with the Order in TW1 and play the Roche path in TW2, the Order (of which Siegfried is now Grand Master) is friendly when you get to Loc Muinne.

They're friendly even if you follow Iorveth in TW2.

It's a book in the game. A story within a story. So there's no need for this to be acurate. Dandelion, best friend of Geralt the witcher, famous bard and great poet..is specialized in bending and breaking the truth in order to create more interesting literature and music. :D Yeah...others already pointed out that this is wrong.

A general hint: Read at least the first two books. Both are quite easy and quick to read because they consist of short stories.

They wont cover all the details, especially the later events concerning Yennefer, Geralt and especially Triss, are not mentioned before the third book (and on towards the last). But it will give you a head-start on the story and both games are referring to those two books very often. More often then you might realize right now... The order of the flaming rose is still there and some of the main figures, if still alive, will make a difference at the end of the game.

In regards of the Grand Master...well...you dealt with that situation in The Witcher , didn't you? This story came to an end and obviously does not continue in The Witcher 2. Agreed. At least a mentioning of that character would've been nice.

There is though a mentioning in one of the later books concerning how her life continued, what she did and so on (a glimpse of the future, like "and xyz went to abc, became a famous blabla and died of old age...").

So at least it is quite canon that her path lead her into another direction than Geralt's. Their paths may have never crossed again...I mean besides their meeting in The Witcher (which played after all the bookd btw.).

I was going to say something about other developers and a need to compare one product to another to ensure that it is being judged fairly and not on a whim of people who might not necessary enjoy the story (or even know it well enough to comment on it)... but then I realised it will once again be largely ignored.

Don't be dramatic :)

All the cool kids moved on to the new forum, and internet time is faster than normal time so this place is already dilapidated. Because of that, there's a good chance of thoughtful observations not causing the kind of discussion that they used to.

If you challenge everyone here to a bare-knuckled boxing match, on the other hand...

Now THAT sounds like a challenge :)