• voracitude@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      The earlier games are far clunkier and take a lot more effort to get into. It’s true that someone who played and loved TW3 is more likely to get over that hurdle, though.

      • itslilith
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        Witcher 1 is really clunky, but 2 feels pretty good already and I’ve enjoyed the story a lot, almost more than 3

    • yeehaw@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      I got pretty far in w1, it was the first I tried. I own them all, but at the time my computer couldn’t quite do w2. I played a little of it. I do intend to do it at some point. Why is it so underrated?

      • thelittleblackbird@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Many reasons to say that:

        • beautiful art
        • great graphics
        • nice plotting with enough elements to really absorb you in the quest
        • world with it own personality
        • our beloved Gerald
        • well done / not flat characters

        It is true that tw3 is a better game, but if you are really apassionated about it the definitely tw2 will also fill your (already high) expectations.

        Nad it is underrated because many people only knows and only explored tw3 without giving any opportunity to previous releases. To the point that a lot of the fan base was created when this game became available for free download in some game platform.