In my opinion these questions are almost universally subjective and don't bring much value to the site. It is very difficult to answer whether and which of the predecessors are mandatory to understand the story. Video games are a more self-contained medium than books and films and games in which gameplay mechanics can't be effectively learned by starting from a sequel are few and far between.

The best example I know is this answer (+20/-1 votes) to "Do I need to play previous Witchers before Witcher 3?" question:

The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings I highly recommend, great story and you make some big decisions.

The Witcher is a bit old now and the controls can get a little out of control so I would advise you to check a synopsis online.

As you can see, he recommends skipping the first game in a story-driven series and doesn't provide a meaningful explanation to why the game is best avoided.

  • 4
    One bad answer doesn't mean we should toss out a whole subset of questions, thats pretty much tossing the baby out with the bathwater.
    – user11502
    Aug 31, 2017 at 21:57
  • @Ash: The answer has +20/-1 votes.
    – user598527
    Aug 31, 2017 at 22:01
  • I think most of them can be reworded as "Does the story/plot refer to the previous games considerably?", which is not opinion-based in my opinion.
    – antimo
    Aug 31, 2017 at 22:27
  • 1
    @CC. That answer OP gave a recommendation to avoid Witcher 1 based on their knowledge and experience of the Witcher series, that sounds like Good Subjective to me.
    – Robotnik Mod
    Aug 31, 2017 at 22:37

1 Answer 1


I disagree with your premise that these questions are "almost universally subjective".

These types of questions answer a real and objective question.

"Is the anything from previous games a major part of the game in question?"

There are objective ways to address this.

Will the game place you in the middle of things without explanation?

It's not subjective to determine if the game puts you in situations you aren't prepared for. You can address if there are any mechanics or critical knowledge that is required from previous games, and not explained to a new player. You may be able to provide a description of the type of things that you would encounter (though I would avoid specifics for spoiler reasons).

Does this game form a standalone coherent story?

This is also not subjective. There isn't really a subjective storyline to the game. There is a definite series of events and information provided to the player. It's entirely possible (and not that difficult IMO) to analyze the story of the game and find instances of things that do not fit the narrative, unless you had played previous games.

To address the specific question you mention; their answer is objective facts followed by subjective opinions that are supported from fact-based experience. It seems like a fine answer to me. Considering the upvotes, I assume others familiar with the series agree.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .