Sequels/Prequels as part of a long running series. How do you handle them?

StarKnightX

StarKnightX

CAGiversary!
Feedback
234 (100%)
This is kinda an odd and stupid question but it's been one that has been nagging me for a while. Not for any important reason , just something that I've been curious about how everyone else deals with it.

Alright so at this point we are all used to sequels and prequels in long running and popular game series (as well as books , movies ect.). For most people , you just play and digest the games/books/movies as they come out. But what about for the people (like myself) where I might end up not getting to a series of games until after a lot of S/Ps have been made. The question is , should a story/series be absorbed in a chronological order of events in the game world , or should they be taken in by release order of when the titles were made.

A few examples to try and make my case.

Grand Theft Auto. The release order of the last gen games was:
3 , VC , Advance (I think) , SA , LCS , VCS.
The Chronological order would be VCS , VC , SA , LCS , Advance and 3. Now in this case release order probably does make more sense , because 1. The GTA series long running plot really isn't a major factor , and 2. Playing it chronologically starts you with the more advanced games and ends you with the most primitive.

A slightly better example , Suikoden. Release Order is of course:
1 , 2 , Card Stories , 3 , 4 , Tactics , 5.
Chronological order would be Tactics (sorta) , 4 , 5 , 1 , Card Stories , 2 and 3.

To use a movie example (I can actually argue this one since I've seen the movies) Star Wars. Lucas intends the movies to be seen in chronological order , but most fans would say to watch them in release order. Both have there advantages in disadvantages.

To use a book example , Chronicles of Narnia. Reading the Magicians Nephew first (Chono 1 , release 6) gives you interesting incite into how everything started , but without reading the other stories first are you going to stay interested? Not to mention that finding out about Jadis won't really matter to you if you haven't read Lion , The Witch and the Wardrobe first.

I know ultimately the answer is probably gonna vary from series to series but I just kinda wonder what fellow cags think about this , if at all.

Also note , I considered putting this thread in off topic , since movies and books could be a part of this discussion too , but since games were the first thing to come to my mind that's where I started the thread.
 
the gta series stands out of chronology. by that i mean you can play san andreas, or vice city or gta 4 or gta 3 and never play the others and it doesnt matter. the stories only intersect very slightly and not in a way where it matters.

i dont mind seuqels/prequels overall as long as they put in the work to make them signifigantly better like the god of war series. each one is massivley better than the first but too many sequels can be annoying especialy when a series is artificially stretched out for money reasons and the final story never gets finished due to money problems( like the legacy of kane/soul reaver series).
 
I generally feel that stories should be read in the order they are produced unless the creator states otherwise. This is because that is still technically the order the stories were written in, regardless of where they take place.

That being said, sometimes it IS more rewarding to play games in a chronologically linear order, I did this with the Metal Gear Solid series and I found it to be a more enriching experience as such. I picked up on a lot of the subtleties in the story that I wouldn't have if I had played it as 1 2 3 4 instead of 3 1 2 4.
 
[quote name='Maxim']I generally feel that stories should be read in the order they are produced unless the creator states otherwise. This is because that is still technically the order the stories were written in, regardless of where they take place.

That being said, sometimes it IS more rewarding to play games in a chronologically linear order, I did this with the Metal Gear Solid series and I found it to be a more enriching experience as such. I picked up on a lot of the subtleties in the story that I wouldn't have if I had played it as 1 2 3 4 instead of 3 1 2 4.[/quote]

Interesting that you mention Metal Gear Solid , since a lot of people feel that playing 3 before the rest messes up stuff for 1 and 2. Mainly that you end up knowing certain things before they meant you to know them , as well as missing details that you wouldn't get the relevance of.
 
[quote name='StarKnightX']Interesting that you mention Metal Gear Solid , since a lot of people feel that playing 3 before the rest messes up stuff for 1 and 2. Mainly that you end up knowing certain things before they meant you to know them , as well as missing details that you wouldn't get the relevance of.[/quote]

I didn't get that feeling at all really, probably because I knew a lot about the series before I actually went into it.

I still think 3124 is the best order because of the way it gives information to you. I'd go into why but without spoiler tags I'd rather not.
 
[quote name='StarKnightX']Interesting that you mention Metal Gear Solid , since a lot of people feel that playing 3 before the rest messes up stuff for 1 and 2. Mainly that you end up knowing certain things before they meant you to know them , as well as missing details that you wouldn't get the relevance of.[/quote]

It's true that you'd lose some of the twists and reveals that made the earlier developed pieces so powerful, but you'd be introduced to new twists and reveals based on your own re-ordering.

Taking Star Wars as an example, if you were to watch the original trilogy first, one of the major twists is that Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker's father... obviously.

If you were to watch it chronologically, then it would be revealed that Anakin Skywalker becomes Darth Vader.

The same can be said for MGS or any game series with twists and prequels. While I can't really say which is a better approach to the story (I generally prefer to experience them in the order they are written/developed), each DOES have its own set of developments that make it interesting.
 
Personally, I think it's best that you read/play/watch the earliest published ones. Use GTA as an example. I played GTA 3 first, and some of the characters do overlap (Donald Love, the main character, etc.) with the other games. For Donald Love and VC, the player was able to see how Donald Love was before he came to Liberty City. For the main character, it was cool to see how Catalina and MC got together in San Andreas and lead to the events in GTA 3.

I feel Chronicles of Narnia is the same. The later stories (I guess mainly prequels) are more appreciated if I was able to read The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe first. As much as I am disappointed with the announcements of prequels sometimes (since it does not further the story for me), it still plays a big part in my enjoyment.

And on a different note, technology advancements (mostly graphics) is a personal preference. So if I even play MGS series, it would be 1 (GC), 2 (PS2/Xbox), 3 (PS2), and 4 (PS3).
 
another interesting game is RE.

the first half of RE3 is before RE2 while the second half is after RE2. So if you want to play the series chronologically you need to play first half of RE3, then RE2, and then second half of RE3
 
[quote name='62t']another interesting game is RE.

the first half of RE3 is before RE2 while the second half is after RE2. So if you want to play the series chronologically you need to play first half of RE3, then RE2, and then second half of RE3[/quote]

Suikoden Tactics was the same way. First half of the game was before 4 , second half was after 4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top