Is it necessary to finish the first game?

[Ketonasarus]

I was about 75% done KCD1, is it necessary to finish the first game to understand the story of KCD2?

[Machiavelli]

well there are some spoilers

[Sekai]

Not really. The intro scenes of KCD2 is long and gives you flashbacks of the basic plot of KCD1.

[Xevicho]

Finish the first one, do some side quests. No time pressure here.

[BojanglesThePug]

I got through to the point where you have to raid Talmberg on my replay through the original game before the sequel came out then jumped right into KCD 2 when it released. I have no regrets. The second game is so much better and I loved the first game. I plan on going back to the original and finishing it later. Just enjoy the new one now that it's here.

[Volibert]

playing kcd1 is only necessary if you want to know about characters and relationships and other stuff mentioned in kcd2 that happened in kcd1 besides the story

[Urist]

Originally posted by Volibert:

playing kcd1 is only necessary if you want to know about characters and relationships and other stuff mentioned in kcd2 that happened in kcd1 besides the story

And in some cases the game even catches you up on things, especially if it is about things you can choose in the first game

Like at one point you are being asked about Theresia and your choices are all the relationship choices you can make in first game and so walks you through the questline in a short choose your own adventure style story

[Random Zero Gravity]

Originally posted by Xevicho:

Finish the first one, do some side quests. No time pressure here.

Agree, the basic plot is not enough of to be called a story at all. You missing a lot from the actual story it self. If you play this game for story purpose, then play the first one, if story don't matter to you, then skip the first.

[Bad Brad]

Yes! You are not worthy to play the sequel until you finish the first one, by order of the KCD community.

[Querm]

I'm not that deep into the game, I wouldn't say that you need to for any kind of important lore or anything. You can understand what's going on in KCD2 without playing the first. My thing is that so far the side quests and writing and events were a lot more entertaining in the first game.

[makbthemf]

KCD2 would spoil you the KCD1 ending. KCD1 is a much better game in scenario terms than KCD2, so it would be better if you finished the first game, and wouldn't spoil your impression.

[Junders Plunkett]

No, but it will be more impactful if you do.

[MusicforMovies]

Originally posted by Volibert:

playing kcd1 is only necessary if you want to know about characters and relationships and other stuff mentioned in kcd2 that happened in kcd1 besides the story

I will say I was surprised to see an obscure reference to an optional side quest in KCD 2 which I got having done that particular side quest in KCD, but I was thinking I wouldn't have quite gotten the reference without playing KCD.

[BingusDingus]

No, but playing through the first game will definitely add some much needed context to many of the events and conversations.