I played The Witcher 2 on 360 and just finished Wild Hunt and both expansions on PS4 and was curious about going back to this game. I picked it up awhile back on a GOG sale for a couple bucks. Reading some of the threads here and it sounds like the game definitely has some rough patches but I really enjoyed the story and lore in the other two games. I was curious if the game still holds up well and enough and if it would be worth it for me to go back and give it a go as a fan of the sequels.

I enjoyed it for the story and characters. I wasn't that into the gameplay, so I eventually just bumped it down to the easy setting and breezed through most of the combat.

It might be tough going back to it after playing 2 and 3, but it's worth playing at least once.

It was kind of a weird game when it came out...

I played it about 2 years ago and had a pretty good time with it so I would say that if you enjoy that universe it's a good one of those.

You bet your sweat patootie it does.

First off, I still love this game to death. I actually replayed it fairly recently just so I could experience it again. With that being said, maaaaan does this game have some jank and a half. Mostly just in the way the game mechanics work, its a weird split between the Diablo style action-adventure and your more standard click'n'swing gameplay. If you can put up with it, and it's not that bad to be honest, everything else still holds up. Sure, you're not getting modern Witcher VO and graphics, but the acting is still fairly decent and the story and characters hold up great. I'd say give it a try, but be prepared to lower the bar quite a bit.

I'm gonna dissent and say no. Even when that game was brand new, it was weird and clunky. Nine years has not been kind with it.

I tried to go back a few months ago and could barely get past the opening sequence. I would play it on easy mode and just cruise if you feel the need to play it.

Also that game has some creepy sex cards which even at the time struck me as childish.

@meteora3255: I liked it a lot when it came out but if you liked the gameplay of W2 and W3 you should temper your expectations IMO. There's a decent story and characters you'll recognize but the combat is completely different and the animation looks pretty last gen. The thing that stands out is the world - it was fun at the time to play something that felt more grounded than a lot of the other typical high fantasy you find elsewhere.

I can't say I suggest it for everyone but if you can get past its dated mechanics for an hour or two I think you'll enjoy it.

The game has a really steep learning curve. I've tried multiple times to get into it, and if I stepped away for more than a day, the combat would no longer click with me. I really struggled with the timing of the fights.

I'm in the same boat as OP and have been itching to play The Witcher for years now. Annoyingly, I can't seem to get it to work on my PC. It just keeps crashing on me and I can't seem to fix it.

It takes some getting used to that's for sure. I did end up enjoying it, but I also played it before I played The Witcher 2 and 3. I can't see the combat being as engaging after those two games. The Witcher 1 is actually pretty easy by comparison. Not as... rewarding, in terms of combat I feel.

I played it right before i played 2 when it came out, I enjoyed it but it's definitely not the same type of game. It's more like Kotor with a queued input system that took some getting used to, the graphics weren't great either. Story wise it was still fun pretty damn good though.

*edit* maybe it didn't have a queued type system, i may just be remembering it that way lol.

I think so, little janky but I much prefer it to 2

I didn't even like it all that much when it came out even though I really wanted to. The series really grabbed me with 2. Feel free to try it but I will not go to bat for it at all. The pacing was rough and for me just about everything with the mechanics was rough and off putting.

It probably holds up decently, but (as has been said already) going back to it after enjoying 2 and 3 might be pretty rough. I remember actually enjoying the combat when I played it though (and feeling that 2 was a step back), but it is a different beast. And that's not even talking about how the art style of the games became more and more westernized as they came along.

Clunk* I even love old PC games that need some love, but I could never get through Witcher 1.

I liked The Witcher 1 a lot when I played it like... 4 years ago, but I remember it being rough even then. It fits the mold of a janky European RPG a lot more than its sequels, though the writing and characters are almost as good. If you do go back and play it, I'll warn you that the story doesn't get "good" until midway through the second act and the combat is kinda bad. If you can endure that, I'd imagine it holds up just fine.

It was pretty good when I first played it, but I think it probably hasn't aged well. The combat was sort of janky and had a lot of really cheap feeling status effects and insta-kill crap you had no real defense against. What I will give it credit for, having read some of the Witcher books, is that it's definitely the closest in tone to the novels.

It is a good sort of "retrospective" on the whole series though. Sort of like the Uncharted Collection - playing through all three lets you see how the games improved and CD Projekt got better as developers.

As someone who absolutely loves the game, no not in the slightest. The combat is sloppy, the controls are janky and the pacing is very plodding (some how the UI is the best out of all the 3 games though.) It does have fantastic atmosphere, world building and a great overall plot but a lot of the voice acting and animation work make it really hard for people to go back to now especially if you've played The Witcher 2 and 3. That being said you have the game you may as well give it a shot. Me saying it hasn't aged well doesn't mean people can't enjoy it anymore but you certainly have to be a special person with high tolerance for old game design conventions and B-grade production quality attempting AAA grade.

If you do try it you'll most likely hit the brick wall that most people do in the first chapter in the Outskirts, if you can manage enjoy that then I think you might be one of those special people. Also prepare to fight Drowners... lots of Drowners.

Combat was the worst one simply because it wasn't fluid, though I did like aspects of it more than what two brought. In general though, to me personally, it's the second best Witcher game. Two was my least favorite. Holding up visually, no. I think the music is great, the environments you go to are good, and the story and characters are likable. I think the first Witcher has more in common with three than two does other than combat really. I will say though, give it some time if you do play it, because it takes a while for it to really click, at least it did for me, and I know a friend of mine never played far into it because it didn't for him, in the same area that it didn't click for me. I played through two first, and I was let down by it, and then played the first when I had a PC good enough to run it, and though it, again, took me some time to get into, where I would stop for weeks, or even months before getting back into it, when I finally sat down and really focused on it, it turned out to be a really great gaming experience.

After I beat the first one, I went back to two, which I otherwise would have never done probably, and it was still fine, but not as good as the first. Three came out, and I was excited, and it's my favorite game of 2014, and the best Witcher game. Furthermore, what do you mean by 'finish' when it comes to Witcher 3? It takes a long time to do everything in it; over 200 hours. Finishing just the story is just scratching the surface, though to me, also one of the best parts. It's a delight to just explore that world though, both just for the sake of doing it, but mainly because there's so much in the game that you can run into, which you will still come upon nearly 300 hours into the game. I would say if you've already played three, there's not much reason to go back to the first. The first Witcher takes about 50 - 55 hours if you do everything.

Depends what you go in for. The story absolutely does. Though I'd say play on an easy difficulty because the combat doesn't and you could argue that it never really did

I tried playing it for the first time in around 2014. Played it for a couple hours and never launched it again. So I don't think so.

I had fun with it last year. Good luck getting past the first stage boss dog thinng... Hardest fight in the whole game. I honestly did not mind the combat. I didn't like it but I didn't dislike it either. To me, it was just its own thing.

Pretty good storyline, terrible gameplay.

Yeah sort of, the narrative and characters are the main propellant (arguably true for the whole series). I was so hungry for Witcher content, I actually went back and finished the 1st one after I beat the 2nd one. If you can get past a slightly hinky combat system, and repetitive character models, all the charm is still there.

Oh and probably worth installing some mods:

http://www.nexusmods.com/witcher/mods/669/?

I assumed this mod, takes it name from the proposed console ports that were planned, but ultimately abandoned in favour of directing resources at the Witcher 2. I recently found a reminder my phone of for the release of the never to arrive game.

Played it for the first time last year and ended up beating it. It's alright; I'm glad I played it.

I played through it last year and really enjoyed it! It's not hard to learn just really different from anything else you've played in terms of mechanics.

I think the story holds up, even though its hokey and the VO isn't great. The gameplay doesn't hold up, but I still had fun playing it for the first time a year or so ago.

@ntm: I finished every notice board quest, every side quest I could find, exploted about 65-75% of the map and called it a day. I got what I wanted out of that game.

Thanks for all the replies. I think I will try to power through the first part this weekend and see if it clicks or not.

@meteora3255: When it came out, it was a very bad game with very good writing. That still hasn't changed today, so it holds up just as well as it did then. If you can deal with that jank and roughness, great! It's a really interesting story, even moreso than Witcher 2 and 3 in a lot of ways. If not, that's fine, too; everything surrounding the writing leaves a lot to be desired and the game itself does the writing and world-building a pretty huge disservice.