I see the first two games as tales and the third as a continuation of the novel.
I like the first and second game more because we have a Geralt with no memory and ends up getting into a ''high trouble'' as we say here, he is not directly involved with the plot and at the same time he is, I think it's cooler and so did not expect this in the third game because at the end of The Witcher 2 explain somethings and when a learn that Ciri would be in the game, I was a bit disappointing and worrying , but I ''relevei'' it and loved the game, some things I had foreseen happened, so I played prepared, but overall , I actually prefer the first game, I feel like the first game Geralt is what I would like to see more, despite the emotional charge of the third game, I did not care about the outcome of the history between Ciri and Geralt, just like I did not care in the books.
Remembering: I absolutely loved the story of the third game, very well built, beautiful, had a moment that moved me, but I prefer the first and second game because for me are tales, stories, it's like I was reading a book Bernard Cornwell, where Geralt was a witness to the events and I was seeing the world through his eyes, but still, the focus is him. And the mystery of his lack of memory, I think could be another game, without being attached to what turned out to be, I really liked it and the trilogy comes to my TOP 10 games.