I know you all like to meme the Witcher 3 but are the first two

Definitely, the first has the best atmosphere out of all three and is one of my favourite games.

The second is probably not quite on par as 1 and 3 but it has the best story for one where your choices matter and the whole political scene is cool to get involved in.

>>382184505
>Played the first witcher long time ago
absolutely loved it
>Played the second witcher
loved it
>played the third
meh still havent finished the dlc blood and wine area and dont really feel like doing it. Got bored

I feel like open world was a mistake

>>382184505
All games are worth it in their own way. The first one has aged poorly but the story and writing are worth it, especially if you are interested in the world. That said, it shits all over the books story. Be prepared.

>>382184505
First is good but may feel dated in a lot of places. Second is the black sheep of the series and feels all kinds of wrong compared to the other two.

>>382184505
Witcher 2 has the whole Temeria story.

1 is good because it follows the formula of the books using short stories and fairy tales. 2 is a downgrade from 1 because of the focus on the political story with heavy exposition and super serious dialogue for 90% of the game. Combat is also clunky as hell. 3 is a good combination of both but polished to hell and back. Story is a good mix of light hearted romps through the countryside and serious political/war stories. Combat is better than the first two but still nothing to remember it by.

>>382184505
theyre all mediocre in a different way. 1 had the most potential

>>382186810
>is a good combination of both
desu the combat felt far more clunkier than Witcher 2's because of how disjointed the camera was

>>382186932
Hell no. The weird disconnect between how the models interact in 2 made the combat feel awful. At least in 3 I felt I was actually hitting the enemy models with my sword instead of the invisible lightsaber in 2.

Signs were also hot garbage in 2 compared to 3.

>>382187072
Hell yes.
I don't remember the signs being that different.
Witcher 3's camera is just so awful--though I'm sure the impacts felt nicer.

>>382187163
>I don't remember the signs being that different.
Wut

Igni was just a shitty little fireball with a 3 foot range. Aard was just a colorless igni that didn't even do damage. Yrden was just a single little lightning ball on the ground that stunned people and Quen was just a shitty lightning shield. I never even used Axii.

Never had any issues with Witcher 3 camera though, just locked onto stuff and swung it around just like in Witcher 2 if I was surrounded. Didn't feel any different. The impacts and general movement felt a lot better.

File: dg.jpg (3MB, 1920x3148px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x3148px

>>382184505
>are the first two worth it for the Steam sale price?
hell yeah, but be warned:
Witcher 1's combat is garbage, play it on the easiest estting and do it for everything except the combat

Witcher 2 isn't as cool as 1, but the combat is tolerable this time

and remember to take screenshots (Steam is specially useful for this shit) to look back upon your journey after you finish it, and a year later again and feel like time is slipping away too fast