2

I'm new to the Witcher series and wonder if I should spend time going through all of them. I read that the story is somehow related and there's even ability to import saves from previous parts into the next ones. I had a similar experience with Mass Effect, where having started with second piece I eventually replayed the game starting from ME1 for a much more rich experience when I could understand story behind characters from ME1 (and later ME2) showing up in the game.

Thus ultimately my question is, how the three Witchers are related in terms of story (NPCs with history, locations, quest decisions etc.) and if how much time will I have to devote to parts 1 and 2 if I only consider the core story-line of those?

There's a related question, but it only considers the first two Witchers.

  • 2
    Short answer: your choices in 2 makes almost 0 difference in 3 sadly. The first two are still worth playing but that's highly dependent on the person – l I Dec 4 '15 at 20:18
  • This needs some work. It screams opinion based to me. – Dallium Dec 4 '15 at 20:23
  • 2
    FYI: The title to this question is down-vote bait. Subjective, option-based questions are considered off topic. That said, a lot of the text of you question is fine (especially the second paragraph), but some users are just going to see a question that starts with the word 'Should' and just immediately down-vote without looking at it any closer. – GeneralMike Dec 4 '15 at 20:28
  • I'll make this short for you: It's not really going to matter. I've only played The Witcher 3 and at no point did I ever feel left out in terms of story (they explain everything pretty well in documentation). Sure, you'll obviously miss the minor references that occur between almost any games in a series, but it's nothing that will hurt your experience. – Broots Waymb Dec 4 '15 at 22:03
  • I've reworded the question to lose opinion-based subjectivism in the question. HTH – Sergii Zaskaleta Dec 4 '15 at 22:40