Is it worth playing without playing the first game? (The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings)
Sharing opinions, is it possible to play this part without playing the first one?it is better to play the first part, it will be more interesting to play the second
Ce3uK, you, sir, need to read something else, and do it more carefully. It is not clear what and why, sorry, shit in the comments.
Didn't like the plot? Submit your resume to CD, and the flag is in your hands - please us with a super-story of The Witcher in part 3...
Well, the first "The Witcher" is an extremely good game) with pleasure now, on the eve of the release of the second one, I replayed it)
however, I must admit, the graphics are already losing) but there is some kind of unknown magic that captures and does not let go until the final video) And the inserts, where the consequences of your decisions are explained - in general, a great thing)
Therefore, if you have not yet completed the first Witcher, start soon, you still have a week to go through it) by the
way, if there is an import of saves, you need to go through it for sure)
I think it's possible. And probably even necessary, there are few such games.
But for a complete immersion in history, it would be nice to go through the first part. But not necessarily of course.
No, many moments in the first Witcher are really copied, I noticed it myself, but at the same time there is a lot from the developers themselves. For me, The Witcher has become a classic and a masterpiece) I think the second one will be the same)
I would advise you to play, I myself will replay the first part 3 times before sitting down for the 2nd. In addition, there will be a save sync system
nope, don't, the first part can be downloaded by torrent, go through the first part first, you have just a week))
It is desirable to play the first part. Firstly, to feel the flavor of the game, its specificity, unlike other RPGs. Secondly, to then compare with the second part of the Witcher. Thirdly, it’s a good idea to make a safe of the first part in order to transfer armor and swords to the second, namely: the armor of the Raven, the silver sword Moonblade and the steel sword rune Sigil from Makham. Unfortunately, the second part differs significantly from the first in terms of gameplay: the combat is simplified, the use of Signs, Elixirs and Oils is more complicated, and their significance is much lower. In addition, the second part is focused on the console and, unlike the first part, has a stripped-down RPG component. The second part is more action / RPG.
I myself repeatedly and with great pleasure replayed the first part, playing both neutral, and for squirrels, and for the Order, and for melee, and for a battle mage. Recently I started playing the second part - its difference from the first is striking, and IMHO for the worse.
Therefore, if you have practically never played RPGs, then you can safely skip the first part and play the second part, maybe you will like it.
alex4706 I
support the proposal.
Many points of the second part begin to clear up after passing the 1st part.
I will now go through part 1 and start part 2 from the beginning.
Bastarder
simplified combat, complicated the use of Signs, Elixirs and Oils, and their significance is much lower
Well, I don’t know about simplifying combat. And the difficulty in the form of a delay in the time of a blow inflicted on a strong opponent (Kratokriks, for example, if I remember correctly) is somehow difficult to call complexity
. I failed.