For you, is it worth it to start from the first game in every franchise? I have the urge to do that, but I feel that sometimes it ends up with me not playing what I actually want, and as a consequence, I play less games. I know that doing it enhances the experience later when playing the "best" entries, but it sometimes is such a drag to even think about playing 5+ whole games before getting to what you are actually interested in
>sometimes it ends up with me not playing what I actually wantYou answered your own question. If you want to play a game, go and play it. If you like it and want more, go back to play the previous games in the franchise, or the later ones.
>>12024657I know, but sometimes I think "I'd probably enjoy this game much more if I played what came before it", which 90% of the time is true, but makes playing the other games feel like a chore
>>12024652I can relate, and this mentality has prevented me from playing a number of games I've wanted to play just because the earlier entries either didn't interest me, or because I just didn't enjoy what I played of them. I want to learn how to get over this and allow myself to skip to sequels more often, like I was willing to do when I was younger.I know from experience that playing an original game after playing its sequel can be an interesting experience, so it's not like there's anything intrinsically wrong with it other than if you're worried about spoilers.Picrel is a game I've been wanting to play for years, but haven't because I could never be bothered to play through the original.
>>12024662I understand that, but if your alternatives are either playing a game just to get to the sequel while not enjoying the experience, or straight up never getting to play a game because of feeling like you have to play the prequel first, like >>12024679, then you should just play the game you WANT to play, anon.It can be easy to forget, but gaming should always be about having fun. Maybe you won't get the full story, sure, but there's nothing stopping you from playing the prequels later. Think about it, did you worry about playing things in order when you were a kid, or did you just play whatever you wanted to because it looked fun?
>>12024652I've always been like this and it's crippling. I feel like I've played through so much stuff I didn't even like just to move onto the game I really wanted to play. Then sometimes you get burned out on the gameplay similarities that you can't even enjoy it.
>>12024690Yeah, that's true. Plus, I know that sometimes I might not even get to that game if I play from the start. I've been getting into SciADV lately, and god, I wouldn't have been able to get through Chaos;head without having played Steins;gate first. You are probably right, even though I didn't get the "full experience" the first time around, nothing stops me from replaying the game after playing it's prequels. I can keep starting from the first if I'm really interested in the franchise as a whole, but I can't be doing this with everything I play
>>12024705>Then sometimes you get burned out on the gameplay similarities that you can't even enjoy it.Happened to me a lot too, that's why, when playing through sagas of long games, I tend to play other stuff in the middle, as not to get tired of the genre
>>12024679If my grandma started finding a book boring, she’d read the last page. If that was good, then the second to the last page. Then the third. If she was still interested but didn’t understand what was going on after some pages from the end, she’d read the whole thing. Why not? She would otherwise have trashed the book anyway. Why not get what value was left available to her?Do the same with video games.
>>12024716Fuck, this is really wise shit honestly. You may have convinced me with this
>>12024652It's very rare that I get interested in a game where I don't also get interested in the previous games in the series. Exceptions are when the games are too different from each other like Yoshi's Island from SMW, or in cases like Devil May Cry 2 or Street Fighter 1 where there's a consensus that you should skip it, or in cases like Final Fantasy where the games aren't related anyway. Sometimes in games where the plot doesn't matter and I don't care about seeing the gameplay evolution game by game, like the Contra games or basically any shmup, I also jump around from game to game in that series depending on the mood.
>>12024719No, of course when the story is lineal and shared among games in the franchise, it isn't a problem, as everything is kinda one of the same. The problem is with stuff like Final Fantasy, where, even though they don't share stories, the games are related and full of references to one another. I may be interested in only one, but I know having played the others will make my experience much richer. Same thing with gameplay evolution.
Things that kill enjoyment in games>100% autism>Reading guides beforehand>Playing the games in ordee autism>Spamming savestates >Playing an immersive game on your phone and being constantly taken out of the world of the game to fuk around on your phone
>>12024736100% agree, though I'm ok with savestates, but kinda only for games without save features (arcade, NES, etc). Also, in moderation, like only at the start of a level in a shmup. There's a real beauty to getting through those games nocc and no save though, but it usually isn't my cup of tea.
>>12024734In Final Fantasy's case I'd just play whichever one I want. If I'm interested because of the plot, they aren't related. If I'm interested because of some gameplay factor like the job system or ATB, there's no point in playing games without these systems, while on the other hand I'm probably also gonna be interested in the previous games that use these systems anyway. If it's just some references here and there, I'd rather play the game I want first and then get the references retroactively when playing the others later. Really, the only situation I could see where I'd force myself to play a game I don't like before one I like, is if it's a very plot heavy series like Metal Gear for example, but I end up disliking one specific game. Even then I might end up looking up a playthrough on youtube.
>>12024745You know, that's the right way. I can't be expecting to experience everything as if I grew up with it. I'm not a kid in the 90s, Final Fantasy 1 isn't gonna be a mindblowing experience, it's going to be a story lesson. I can't expect myself to get though it if I don't even care enough about what it built. For plot heavy stuff I don't really mind honestly, it feels like everything actually is building up to what comes after, so I usually don't mind. Also, plot heavy franchises tend to have less entries than ones with individual stories.
>>12024734In Final Fantasy's case id argue playing the games in order might sour your opinion of later entries and not enhance. Playing 2 after 1 might upset you at how different it is. Playing 4 after 3 can make you wonder why they removed so many teambuilding options that were present in the previous game. Playing 5 after 3 and 4 can make you realize how incestuous, derivative, and repetitive the series can be. When talking about Dragon Quest though I do agree that playing them in order has a cumulative effect where all your experiences in the previous games builds on each new entry and it really feels like you are rewarded for all your knowledge and it is much richer.
>>12024753That's good to know, I've been thinking about playing DQ1. I guess sometimes it depends a lot on the franchise and what's best is to ask people who have already played
>>12024756I will amend my reply to clarify that I believe you should always start from the beginning in a series despite knowing that sometimes playing earlier games might taint your experiences in later ones because being tricked into liking a game more due to ignorance of its predecessors can leave you feeling hollow, I know from experience.
>>12024750>Final Fantasy 1 isn't gonna be a mindblowing experience, it's going to be a story lesson.I agree with>>12024753Depends entirely on what interested you in the first place. Being a simpler game without focus on plot might be a selling point to some. But if you're expecting characters you get attached to, things like chocobos and whatnot, there's really no point.
>>12024690I totally agree. The difficult part is getting my OCD to cooperate with it, because while the logic is sound, OCD doesn't operate on logic. But, I guess it's one of those things that I can challenge myself with, to try to learn to overcome that mental block.>>12024716That's a neat approach, though the closest analogue video games have is using level skip cheats to play the later parts of a game, and that's not something I particularly enjoy doing. I'm guessing that's not what you're suggesting though. Then again, for games where I've played the intro a million times and don't want to deal with it again, that could be a good way to do it.
>>12024657This.I guess the real answer is... it depends. If the 1st title is pretty good and the stuff you want to play, that got you interested in the franchise in the 1st place, is early on... it can be fun to see the progress leading up to the title you're more curious about, however if the early titles drag and aren't good and/or the stuff you want to play will take too long to get to, avoid doing it.
>>12024652>For you, is it worth it to start from the first game in every franchise?It depends on the franchise.If all its games are something I would like to play, YES. Otherwise, NO.>I have the urge to do that, but I feel that sometimes it ends up with me not playing what I actually want, and as a consequence, I play less gamesIt's not about the quantity but about quality.There's literally hundreds if not thousands of games worth playing, why play something you don't want to?>I know that doing it enhances the experience later when playing the "best" entriesThat wildly depends on the franchise.Most game series, even those with many direct sequels, don't share a single continued story that you MUST experience first hand in order to enjoy each entry. And if you found yourself in such a predicament that you want to play one game of a franchise like that with many previous titles that don't interest you at all, you'd do yourself a disservice by wasting your time playing them instead of reading a story summary (of whatever complexity you choose) so you get a grasp of the plot and setting up until that point.And if reading is too much for you there's probably plenty of in-depth reviews with spoilers and even franchise retrospective videos that can help you get up to date with it.The takeaway is: play whatever you want.
Honestly, my problem is mainly with games that are A. Too long or too many, or B. Before the 4th console genI know I'm kind of a bitch ass for thinking like that but really, a lot of stuff on the NES or before just feels like they aren't even games, just demo projects for what came after. Take, for instance, FF1. It's impressive as fuck for when it was released, but nowadays, shit like NPCs having one line of dialogue at a time, or every spell and character name being restricted to 4 characters, feels like that wasn't even what they wanted to create, but what they could.
>>12024736>100% autism>Reading guides beforehandSome of the most fun I've had in single player games is discussing them with someone else and discovering that I missed something, or that they did. It doesn't work anymore in the age of internet but back then it made it feel like games could be hiding anything, never truly complete.
>>12024782Play Final Fantasy 3 or Dragon Quest 4 if you want to be impressed by a famicom jrpg.
>>12024789Yeah, maybe I generalized too much, it's also true that the difference between early and late NES is abyssmal, but really, playing some of it's early stuff is very hard for me
>>12024782>Take, for instance, FF1. I didn't play that game, but I played DQ1 and it goes back to it being a selling point. The fact that there was barely any plot or dialogue getting in the way of the adventure, or that the combat is really simple, make it worth it if you just want some exploration and dungeon crawling.>feels like that wasn't even what they wanted to create, but what they could.But sometimes that's for the best. Metal Gear was created because Kojima was told to make a badass military game, but the MSX couldn't handle action with lots of bullets, so you end up with stealth as a focus. We've also seen what happens when we let people like George Lucas for example get too much power to create what they wanted.
>>12024789FF2 is honestly more impressive than 3. DQ4 is probably the most impressive game on the system though
>>12024652Just play the games.
We must promote and adhere to maximalism. Everything you are interested in must be started from the beginning and the beginning only, and only an order of release must be followed. This is the only way you can follow the continuing story.
>>12024993non linear storytelling exists
>>12026375Not disproving my point, you read what is produced first.
>>12024782I played FF1 at least 3 times, maybe more, and only realized that NPCs only ever said one box worth of text max last year when a friend mentionned it in passing.It never felt to me like something was missing.On the contrary I hate when 5th or 6th gen RPGs have WORDS WORDS WORDS WORDS WORDS just to say nothing. Just because they could. What I'm getting at is the opposite issue is worse.
>>12024784I made several great friends like this. Bonding over the mysteries of the obscure (for our medium) vidya we liked.
