Do you care if you play a sequel in a game series out of order?

Just wondering, does anyone here not care what order they play a game franchise in? For example , would you play the newest Ratchet and Clank before playing the ones that came before it? Or any other series/franchise for that matter? I know there are some people that just want a good game to play and a certain genre to play no matter if the game is a sequel or not as long as its fun. But what about anyone here?

Interested to hear your answers.

I can't do that. I'm a sucker for consistency and continuity. The only time I will pass on that is if the previous game in the series isn't actually related story-wise (such as Red Dead Redemption). That's the key though, is the story. I don't like being left out and even if the newer game explains some of the story, it's never the whole story.

Uncharted would be a good example. Though the sequel is definitely the better game of the two, the first does a great job of introducing you to the cast and getting to know the characters and some of their motivations and I think is key to understanding them. I think you would still get a lot of this jumping in to Uncharted 2 without the first, but I think the first game is intergral to the overall character development and understanding.

It depends on how heavily the series emphasizes story. I certainly wouldn't consider playing something like the Xenosaga series out of order, but I wouldn't have issue with something like the Ratchet and Clank series.

YesI care. I would never do that. Not even with games that have different stories. It just does not feel right leaving out the original game(s) that made the series good.

I plan to play Vectorman soon (never got into back in the day) and while I have the actual cart of Vectorman 2...I'm gonna play part 1 first.

Depends. While I didnt like not playing Uncharted 1 before the second, I got by with it and was able to put most of it together from what I knew and what happened in the second game. I wouldn't like to play something like Mass Effect 2 before 1 though.

I never play out of order, there are too many benefits, such as importing a saved game.

Not really. I played and beat Assassin's Creed 2 before even starting on the first game. Of course if I don't know what's going on in the sequel I'm playing, I'm just gonna go right ahead with the original.

I have played lots of franchises out of sequence. Heck, I've even played a two part rpg out of order (Digital Devil Saga). If a game sounds interesting to me, I'll play it. I'm not going to avoid it/delay playing it just because I missed out on earlier games in the series. Imo a good game will be able to stand on its own.

For example, I played the Metal Gears Solid's out of sequence, which many people on the forums will tell you is a big no no. I did eventually play every mgs, and I can honestly say that I still feel like I didn't really miss out on anything by playing them out of order. (In fact, I think I enjoyed the earlier games more because I understood where the story was going better than I would have if I had played them in the correct order.)

The only downside to playing things out of order is that you won't get every single easter egg or inside joke that is included in a game. To me, that's not a big deal. Obviously, different people will put different importance on those types of things.

In most cases, I gotta play in therightorder, but long running series' like Ratchet and Clank or Mario, It's not that important. Since they aren't as closely connected.

But games like Prince of Persia, Ace Attorney, or Dead Rising, I'll play in the right order.

I played MGS4 without playing any of the previous MGS games, and the way the bits a pieces of the story came together for me was very interesting, I actually enjoyed it alot that way. Depending on the game, it could prove to be interesting to play it out of order, maybe not very likely though.

Speaking of DMC4, that is an example of a game that most people will enjoy more if they didn't play the other games. When I played DMC4 it was hard for me not to compare it to its predecessors; especially since they went with such drastic changes in character and gameplay. People who didn't play the other DMCs were able to just enjoy the game for what it was. People who played the other DMCs couldn't help but see the game for what it should have been, but wasn't. So that is a good example of a game where playing it out of order is actually a plus.

I dont' care. It's a video game, I'm not going to lose any sleep over not knowing the full backstory behind everything. And I certainly don't have time to play two games I'm not interested in before I get to the one that I am interested in.

I usually start with the newest one. If I like it, I go back and play the prequel(s).

It depends on how heavily the series emphasizes story. I certainly wouldn't consider playing something like the Xenosaga series out of order, but I wouldn't have issue with something like the Ratchet and Clank series.

Beard_

i agree with you dude :)

I usually start with the newest one. If I like it, I go back and play the prequel(s).

Konekomaru

This! If it's good, I'll want to buy the older games in the series.

I usually start with the newest one. If I like it, I go back and play the prequel(s).

Konekomaru

[QUOTE="Konekomaru"]

I usually start with the newest one. If I like it, I go back and play the prequel(s).

Senor_Kami

But thereare some games that I feel need to played in order though to get the important bits of the story. Like the Prince of Persia Sands of Time trilogy, and the Fire Emblem "Radiant" games. Though they do explain some things, certain twists just won't have nearly as big of a meaning, that's pretty much it but still.Although that's just more important to some people then others I guess.

[QUOTE="Konekomaru"]

I usually start with the newest one. If I like it, I go back and play the prequel(s).

Lex224

This! If it's good, I'll want to buy the older games in the series.