What are some mainstream game series where you really do need to start from the first game? - eviltoast

Some games have decent recaps or disconnected stories which mean you can start from the latest release and still have the full experience.

In Fallout for example, with the 3D games, you can start wherever and because it’s a new protagonist and location every time you aren’t missing a ton. The disconnect is slightly more noticeable going from Fallout to Fallout 2 (the isometric titles) however because of how the games build on top of each other.

What I am wondering about are series where you really do need to start from the beginning (or some early point) to get the full experience.

Can you think of any examples that are truly difficult?

Maybe they started on DOS, MSX, or the NES and their latest releases are on the PS5 and Xbox Series X and on top of that the genre shifted.

This is obviously going to vary from person to person. Like with The Elder Scrolls series for example. People might argue for different starting points.


For context I am playing The Witcher 2 and I feel like I’m missing a notable part of the story. That might be because it’s a fantasy game though and it isn’t based in our world.

It made me think of Metal Gear and Final Fantasy. Two popular series where I don’t know how interconnected the games are.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Even if the stories don’t connect, I always would recommend starting at the earliest point in a series and moving forward, since this allows for a better appreciation of the evolution of the game over several iterations rather than being disappointed by the regression you would see going backwards or jumping around.

    I think maybe the only games that would need to be played in order to make sense, however, are games like the newest FF7 remake. If you didn’t play the first, you’d be jumping into the middle of an ongoing story (the rest of the series is not connected at all aside from 1 or 2 outliers like X2 being a direct sequel to X). They have recaps, but it’s not really information dense (since they’d rather you buy and play the other game). Not many games actually do this. Even ones with interconnected stories usually pace themselves in a way that you could jump in anywhere and still understand pretty much everything.

    Metal Gear is pretty interconnected, but it’s also so convoluted and batshit crazy, it doesn’t matter if you play them in release order, chronological order of the timeline, or pick one at random: you will be equally confused no.matywr what lol

    • Corroded@leminal.spaceOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Even if the stories don’t connect, I always would recommend starting at the earliest point in a series and moving forward, since this allows for a better appreciation of the evolution of the game over several iterations rather than being disappointed by the regression you would see going backwards or jumping around.

      How do you approach remakes/remasters, franchise reboots, and prequels in that case? Do you play them in release order?

      I think taking that approach would put a lot of people in the situation where they are forcing themselves to play something they don’t really want to. How many people have gone back and played TES Arena or even Morrowind?

      Maybe it’s because I like completing games that I start but I feel like just trying every game that lead up to Skyrim would get tiring in a hurry.