The Witcher 3 is one of the best games I've ever played, and I do think The Witcher 2 is worth trying going back to beforehand, considering how much the previous experience enhances the third game. I usually tell people that Chapter 1 (not the intro, which is good) is pretty rough. It's a bit aimless and the first boss there can be too difficult for an early game challenge. After that, it really picks up and sprints through the finish line, in my view. I disagree quite a bit on the writing; I think there's some excellent writing to be found in the game, both with an interesting core cast that continues its level of quality banter and intrigue into the sequel, and also on the politics of neutrality and the ripple effects that a set of small changes can have on the broader power struggles of the continent.

The Witcher 2 is also rare in that it has a genuine branching storyline. It's not quite to the insane degree that Baldur's Gate 3 went with it last year, but it's still very much the kind of design modern AAA publishers/developers shy away from, not wanting to invest resources in whole swathes of the game that half your players aren't going to see. Helps a lot for replay, especially since that first chapter gets smoothed out quite a bit once you know what you're doing.

Before I played any of the witchers, I thought I'd REALLY like them, as the concepts and theme are right up my alley. But ultimately, I came away from the series with... it's just alright.

The first game I bounced off many times due to how slow the start is, and it didn't help that I installed a combat overhaul mod which makes the game WAY too hard. Once I got into the city or chapter 2, I started to enjoy it, but ultimately gave up on it in the second city due to the combat (moral here, play with vanilla combat! Probably would've had more fun). The story was alright, but didn't grip me too much.

Witcher 2 I managed to beat. The combat was fairly decent, and I thought the story and pace were a good improvement, with a beginning that was interesting in its own right. I was quite impressed with how much your choices could change things, and really got into the dice poker. I don't have too much bad to say about it, other than being disappointed that so many of the choices didn't matter in the 3rd game.

3rd game I bounced off similar to the first. I completely cleared out the first area, which left a bad taste in my mouth. I felt the game had unfortunately inherited that sorta directionless feeling so many open world games have, and found a lot of the side content to feel like filler, while the main story was utterly failing to grab me, and I bailed only a few hours in with the baron that has a problem with the baby. I utterly hated that POS but was forced to help him to continue the story, only for him to give a breadcrumb at the end, sending me onto the next breadcrumb. Progress in the main story just wasn't feeling meaningful, and ultimately I just didn't care about any of the characters, and gave up to play something else.

I may have enjoyed the 3rd had I given it more time, and I may have gotten further in the 1st had I not modded it, but with the 2nd game just being 'good' but not blowing my socks off, I figured I'd experienced enough to not really have much desire to go back to it.

Witcher 2 yay, Witcher 1 nay. IMO, the first one really didn‘t age well. It‘s been too long to remember the specifics but what I do remember is me dealing with the gameplay and visuals for the story‘s sake. The second game I started up and was awed by the visuals, the gameplay was much better too. Insane step forward. Again though, it‘s been many, many years so it‘s a blur now.

I really enjoyed the Witcher 1. What really sealed it for me was the questline

It beat the pants off of anything from Witcher 2. I also prefer the alchemy system from TW1.

I dislike that TW2 is basically half a game until you replay it. I'm all for branching paths, but compared to TW1 and TW3, TW2 felt way too short.

I actually agree that I enjoyed playing the first more than the second. In the second, the story just didn't feel very gripping, progression was slow and gameplay ended up quite complicated with weird mechanics. But in the first game, the atmosphere, story and more distraction-free gameplay made up for the overall age of the game.

Witcher 1 is the only game in the franchise I've actually played. And I definitely agree, it's very worth playing. I was really enjoying it. The only reason I never ended up finishing was that at the time I was playing through a Wineskin, and...the damn game was crashing on me every hour at most. Which was pretty appalling considering I was playing on a platform that Steam said was officially supported...

But I have no doubt that if I had been running on Windows at the time I'd have finished it back around 2014 when I was first playing it, because I was really enjoying the story.

I played 1. Skipped 2. Went into 3. Boy did I wish I played 2 before 3. I missed a lot.

I was looking at these just yesterday. I've not played any (but have all 3 in my GOG from freebies) and the age and look of TW1 kinda put me off but you've convinced me to give it a go.

Witcher 1 is playable on controller if you take the time to configure it using a 3rd party software. I recently replayed it using Steam Input on my Steam Deck.