Should I Play The First

[101Titan101]

Is it good or needed?

[JocularJosh]

To get most of what's going on you probably have to play it. I played halfway through, stopped and still understood everything and what has happened.
To be honest the second one is WAY better.
The first one is mostly frustrating (cheap tactics to make the game "hard", story is all over the place etc.) and just too boring most of the time. It pretends to be some very deep, twisted as ♥♥♥♥ game but in the end it is very simple. Gameplay is clunky, it has quite the amount of one-hit enemies/bosses (cheap), the storytelling is just bad....I could go on.
I just had enough of it at one point and stopped. Never played it again ever since, just thinking back at it puts me off enough to never play this game ever again.

Honestly, just go with TEW2. The gameplay is WAY better, Story is clear, it's not as insanely, unfairly hard and the open-world segments are a lot of fun.
If you want to know what exactly happened in the first game just watch a video on youtube.

[dprog1995]

Don't listen to josh. Play the first one first(Even if you want to play in it's easiest difficulty) and then play the assignment and consequence DLCs and then start 2.

2's story will be too confusing when you don't know the characters and some events that happened in the first game.(Which they mention it here)

As for gameplay the first one has better combat and better bossfights but the second one has better stealth and that's it.

[BlackWater]

Should play the first, story is good, and Ive never played a game with so many ways to kill stuuf/make said stuff kill itself. The ONE thing I miss from the first is the burn with matches thing. Though in #2, if you can get a group of badiees together and one is carrying molotovs, one shot to get the molotov to drop and you get 3 - 8 birds with 1 stone er, bullet, depending on proximity. Barrels in 2 can be kicked over for flammable puddles vs just shooting to blow them up. Said flamable puddles ignited with a single pistol shot.

[JocularJosh]

Originally posted by dprog1995:

Don't listen to josh.

"Don't listen to this guy because he doesn't share my opinion".
Grow up.

[dprog1995]

Originally posted by Jocular Josh:

Originally posted by dprog1995:

Don't listen to josh.

"Don't listen to this guy because he doesn't share my opinion".
Grow up.

Because you are misleading a person that may enjoy the first Evil Within 1 game. If Evil Within 1 was terrible there would be no TEW 2 and no DLC for TEW 1.

[JocularJosh]

Originally posted by dprog1995:

Originally posted by Jocular Josh:

"Don't listen to this guy because he doesn't share my opinion".
Grow up.

Because you are misleading a person that may enjoy the first Evil Within 1 game. If Evil Within 1 was terrible there would be no TEW 2 and no DLC for TEW 1.

Well CoD is terrible and how many games are there by now? Yeah, go figure...

[Nikagor]

Originally posted by dprog1995:

2's story will be too confusing when you don't know the characters and some events that happened in the first game.(Which they mention it here)

Never played the first one, was pretty obvious and well explained who everything is and was, I can't chip in on the experience of the first one, but apart from one or two scenes there is no real connection to the previous game, that absolutly needs previous knowledge.

[NIKENIT]

Yes, and both story DLCs. The story in this one is direct continuation of the first part.

There are A LOT of references to the first game that you would not understand, plus the Kidman story and motivation is not explained at all in the second, it is in the DLCs to the first, and she is a MAJOR character. And the world building in general happened in the first, too.

Also, don't watch the teasers, trailers and other material, especially for the dlcs. They spoil the whole frigging plot of the first one, every twist, wow, its Terminator 2 trailer fiasco level of ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.

[trek554]

learn to search instead of asking the same damn thing that has been discussed to death. are you really so ignorant as to think no one has asked this before?

[JocularJosh]

Originally posted by trek554:

learn to search instead of asking the same damn thing that has been discussed to death. are you really so ignorant as to think no one has asked this before?

Wow, trek, helpfull as always.

[Eze]

Not going to sugarcoat this: Yes, your experience with the first one will complement your understanding of the second one (specially if you read the files). You can go full wikia if you want, but the first game is really good too.

[skyguy]

His whole motivation to move through the the first story builds upon the second. The second clears up why things happened. I've only started the second one, but the first is definitely needed to understand the second. At least to understand the protaganist motivations, and the side characters relevant arc that build up to the new sequel.

The first game is amazing, I never knew the game would play out the way it did in the first game especially since I thought it was going to be a Resident Evil game but it's not.

[Damien Azreal]

Yes.
To really understand what is going on, you need to play the first game and the first two DLC chapters.

[Rhyno]

I started with the second one, and I was able to grasp what was going just fine with limited knowledge of the first game. I think if you YouTube a quick synopsis of the first one you'll be more than okay to dive into the second.

[Damien Azreal]

Tango said before the game's release that they setup the second game so it could be played without experiencing the first one.
But, I still think you get a better overall feeling and understanding by playing the first one.

Plus, the first one is great. And just should be played.