• We are delighted to introduce GiftBot 2.0, the next generation of our popular gifting feature. To celebrate, we'll be giving away some incredible prizes over the coming weeks in one big Giveaway Extravaganza!

Which The Witcher 3 DLC should I play?

Which DLC suits my taste better?


  • Total voters
    138

jon bones

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,989
NYC
With the Gwent mobile client coming in December, I felt the need to install it on PC and fell in love. It's a super captivating game at this point, and it made me remember how fond I am of this world.

I am now really looking forward to the Switch release, as I never played the DLC before and I can now play them on my commutes.

I will only have time for 1 - which should I play? My preferences:

-Story is king - I'm looking for something as close to an adventure game as possible

-Romance is a nice bonus - not sure if that's relevant but I like how horny this universe is

-Combat encounters probably don't matter, as I will likely play on Easy

-Gwent doesn't matter, as I play that on the dedicated client
 

Killzig

Member
Oct 25, 2017
454
Based on wanting something a little tighter (like an adventure game) Hearts of Stone might be the one for you. Both are great though.
 

Yerffej

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,168
If time is limited, Hearts of Stone is the clear winner. It's shorter overall and is a great little story on its own.
 

Vyrance

Member
Oct 25, 2017
719
Florida
If story is king then you should go with Heart of Stone. I liked Blood and Wine more because of what a large expansion it was, but Heart of Stone had the better story
 

Jocund

Member
Mar 9, 2018
438
Hearts of Stone has the tighter storytelling and some of the best overall writing in the series. Also Gaunter O'Dimm.
 

edo_kid

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,533
You should play the two, but based on your preferences i would go for Heart of Stone first.
 

Tyaren

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,256
If you don't have much time and story is most important to you, Hearts of Stone. It's more compact (8-10 hours long) and has a fantastic story and characters.
Blood and Wine shines mostly because of it gorgeous new region Toussaint. There is more stuff to see and do and so it will take much longer (20+ hours).
 
Nov 2, 2017
170
Hearts of Stone is shorter but has a better storyline and personally more fun boss fights, so i would start with that one. If it turns out you want even more Witcher 3 you can always go back and start on Blood and Wine.
 

BossAttack

Member
Oct 27, 2017
16,737
First of all, you WILL play both. But, if you have to choose which to play first then Heart of Stone.
 

Carn

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,706
The Netherlands
they're both some of the best expansions you'll ever play, but HoS is the best The Witcher 3 has to offer. To be honest, I think I like both more than the actual main quest.
 

rochellepaws

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,844
Ireland
Heart of Stone was more interesting from a story and character perspective while Blood and Wine was better if you're more interested in exploration and a fresh feeling from new content.
But you should really play both, neither of them waste your time.
 

Beeblebrox

Member
Oct 28, 2017
163
I guess this answer isn't really helpful, but - both, as many people have already said.

Hearts is shorter of the two, so if you're short on time, go with it. But Blood and Wine is also great, and WELL WORTH playing, so get on it as soon as you can!
 

TheMrPliskin

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,812
While I personally prefer Blood and Wine I'd say Heart of Stone better suits what you're looking for. It's substantially shorter and works better as a self contained story.
 
OP
OP
jon bones

jon bones

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,989
NYC
Haha, I may very well play both some day - for now, I will start with HoS. Sounds like exactly what I want right now.
 

danhz

Member
Apr 20, 2018
915
wait
Gwent mobile client coming in December
really? lets gooo, didnt know it, ive been hoping it since i played TW3 !!
 

Fastrun

Member
Oct 27, 2017
147


I liked both but if you had to pick one, go for Heart of Stone. When you have the time, play Blood and Wine after.

The order I played was:
Base game
Heart of Stone
Blood and Wine
 

Budi

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,369
Finland
Going by your preferences, definitely Hearts of Stone. Seems like you will absolutely love it. The romance in it is really lovely. It's also about 10-15 hours shorter than Blood & Wine, though make sure to make time for it later too. You don't want to miss the new region, also a great story in that.
 

abellwillring

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,894
Austin, TX
Heart of Stone has a really great story but I think Blood and Wine's is solid too and the visuals are just so special.. I had to go with that. I don't think you'll be let down by the story by any means.

HOS is shorter though by some margin as I recall so if that is of some additional interest, maybe that's a better choice.
 

Ænima

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,947
Once you finish the main story, play Heart of Stone, then Blood and Wine.

Blood and Wine will feel more like an adventure as you will travel to a new map so you have a whole new area to explore and you even get a house for urself. Heart of Stone story is more compact but its an amazing story with great characters. Both DLC have romantic new scenes.

I trully recomend getting time for both.
 

Antiax

Member
Oct 27, 2017
860
You should play both but if you have time for only one then I would recommend Hearts of Stone because it's shorter and story is in my opinion better.
 

CerealKi11a

Member
May 3, 2018
383
First post nails it. Just find a way to play both, but if you’re strapped for time, try Hearts of Stone since it’s shorter.
 

Braag

Member
Nov 7, 2017
998
Both

But if you have to choose... HoS I guess? Despite Gaunter'O Dimm completely stealing the show, I loved Beauclair as a setting and some of the quests in B&W were amazing. Dettlaff is also a very interesting character imo despite seeming like your typical angry villain. So don't miss out on B&W either.
 

PlanetSmasher

The Abominable Showman
Member
Oct 25, 2017
31,971
Just play both. Hearts of Stone is short and then you can dick around with Blood and Wine when you have time.
 

misho8723

Member
Jan 7, 2018
1,356
Slovakia
You should both - Hearts of Stone has one of the best stories and characters in videogame history though
Blood & Wine is almost a new entry in the Witcher series disguised as an older type expansion pack (yes, it's really, really big)
 

diablogg

Member
Oct 31, 2017
678
I still think about Hearts of Stone years after I played it. Such an amazing expansion, I'd start with that and then settle into the new world of Blood and Wine.
 

Anoxida

Member
Oct 30, 2017
364
heart of stone is fantastic and quite possibly the greatest quest line in the entire series. that being said B&W is basically another game in of itself and gives u the best bang for your buck.

Tldr; get both.
 

♡♪!?

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,756
Blood and Wine feels like a new 20 hour game to me. I recommend that more in general , it's a great game with a wonderful setting but to answer your requirements people seem to prefer the overall story for Heart of Stone
 

S t e l l a R

Member
Oct 27, 2017
348
Turkey
I don't want to exaggerate but Blood and Wine almost felt like a new game. While I enjoyed both and the main game, Blood and Wine's setting and the story is a clear winner for me.
 

Archon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
562
Heart of stone is a tighter and stronger narrative whilst Blood and Wine is more like an expansion like Shivering Isles.

Play both, they're both worth it and are fantastic.
 

BoxManLocke

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,638
France
Pffft, you'll play Hearts Of Stone first, go "damn that was so fucking good", then fork over the cash for Blood And Wine, and it'll be worth it.