Do I need to play the previous games?

[Cake]

Never really could get into the 2nd or 1st game, will that hinder my experience of this "great" game?

[MaximumEffort]

You need the previous game like you need to fondle someone balls before making a conversation.

[Havelhoff]

I never played the previous games but i think i did pretty good tho.
But after finishing the game i can say: it's definitely better to play'em.

[Cake]

Originally posted by sjrekis:

You need the previous game like you need to fondle someone balls before making a conversation.

Lmao, great comparison.

[The Time Traveler]

Play the previous games only if you want to be worn out by Geralt and his viciously boring monotone way of talking. Geralt's voiceover is the real epic enemy you will face during the entirety of your adventure.

[Nebukarr]

The Witcher II is worth a look. It's not open world, but full of story-twists and well-designed characters.
Nevertheless, I've never finished The Witcher. Although it has an interesting story, it's graphics and combat-system is ...well ....old. Most landscapes look empty.

So, if you're not fully into the Witcher Universe, I recommend playing the second part.

[Dave1029]

No, just make sure you're aware of major plot points. Ciri I don't think is hardly even mentioned in the past games.

[cloister56]

I think it's similar to the question do I need to read the books. You don't have too the game is awesome and you can read the character information for background.
The books are all set before the Witcher games so give you most of the backstory some of which is referenced. You will barely know who Yennefer is unless you read the books. The Last Wish and The Sword of Destiny are both excellent collections of short stories featuring Geralt.
For Ciri most of her story comes in the 5 book series starting with Blood of Elves, very epic and a great read.
So back to the games in terms of story The Witcher starts with Geralt with amnesia so you can forge your own Geralt and although people know you, you don't know them. The story is excellent as Geralt slowly pieces things together. As for gameplay the combat is odd but as you learn more techniques gets steadily better and better. I gave up the first time at Kaer Morhen but stick with it. The game is a challenge but I think worth it for the story.
Witcher 2 makes the controls much better and the graphics are improved. I don't think the story is quite as good but that still makes it great.
Like Mass Effect you can pull your save over from game to game so decisions you made can be referenced.

In summary what I am trying to say is that the Witcher story is so good that I would recommend experiencing all parts of it. I am sure you will enjoy the Witcher 3 as a standalone experience, I think you will find it harder to go back and play the earlier games after you have played the third. But maybe the story and the world will grab you so much that you just want more Witcher.

[Living Broscillograph]

Originally posted by Living Broscillograph:

Originally posted by GunnDawg:

I picked this game up for sale today and while it's still downloading I got to thinking "wait, this is the third game in a series, I'm gonna be lost"

You won't be lost (CDPR did awesome work to make the game easy to learn and play in comfort for people not familiar nor with the trilogy nor with the books which story comes before the trilogy) but you're gonna be hated because of perfunctory understanding of the big story.

P.S.: See Yen vs Triss holy wars on forums for an example of ultimate misunderstanding between only-TW3 (and/or TW2-TW3) players and those who at least played the trilogy.

Originally posted by Living Broscillograph:

All trilogy tells a single story split into three major acts. So in terms of involving into the story it's absolutely worth playing all three games.

You can "play" the first two games on YouTube but it's better to play them yourself because many reviewers and letsplayers miss details in which the devil is (like for some reason many of them think that sex scenes are important content and thus shouldn't be avoided. However, somewhere it replaces plot details completely ruining the statement of its importance).

In terms of gameplay TW1 is like SW:KotOR but in real-time instead of turn-based (and almost without companions). It's graphics are much better compared to KotOR series :)
TW2 steps towards console players thus its controls can annoy on PC (especially after TW1).
While last difficulty of TW1 makes a player understand the importance of oil / bombs / alchemy mechanics, TW2 teaches to roll away and hit with timings.

These skills are important to play TW3 on the last difficulty (which is very enjoying if you went through the first two games). So it's also worth to play them from this point of view :)

[Exarch_Alpha]

Nah, he wouldn´t enjoy it.

[Mr_Faorry]

You'll understand a fair bit more if you play Witcher 1 and 2 beforehand, but they are in no way needed to understand most things in the game.

Witcher 2 is a great game and I'd highly reccomend playing it, as a bonus it'll also give a fair bit of backstory to the events of Witcher 3.
If you can get past the terrible graphics and combat system of Witcher 1, it's worth a play, the story is really good and there are a few great and memorable characters in it.

[tonypa]

No, you do not need to play previous games. W1 and W2 are pretty bad compared to W3 in almost every aspect so you would just waste your time playing them before W3.

If you just want to get hang of the lore and characters, watch some video about story in W1 and W2.

[jell1s]

It will worth it if you decide to read all the books.

[Hiemoustne]

Or like all good book reports - just watch the movie.....oh how good would a witcher movie be!!!

[Janthis]

You'll be more familiar with the story and characters if you play the previous 2 games, but you can also get along just fine without them. The play style in each one of them is different, anyway.

[Gabriel Angelos]

Originally posted by CakeBadger:

Never really could get into the 2nd or 1st game, will that hinder my experience of this "great" game?

Playing the first two games enriches the experience but it is not mandatory to understand the main story arc in W3.

In Blood and WIne for instance you will miss out on the in jokes if you haven't played the first two games. Its packed full of them.