I hit "go public" and went straight to sleep so I'm only just now seeing everyone's comments. A few things I want to say: - I have not forgotten about funny moments. Those will be getting released again soon. - When talking about Kingdom Hearts, this never crossed my mind in the moment, but a variation of the "I don't need to play the older games" type of fan that was probably way more common were the people who only played 1, 2, and then 3 simply because they were the "bigger" numbered games. What I said still applies though. - Once again, if you did start with a later entry, no ill will. But once again, if you were to ask, I'd always default to release order unless, as I said, you don't have the hardware to play Sky. It helps that it's basically the chronological order too.
At this point, I'm so grateful to my friend who was "forcing" me to play the game in order. Like even it took time more than a year for me to finish 3 games of Sky arc. I could say I had the most burnout of the series from that arc. But I love the way it gets you attached slowly but sure, the curiosity to explore more of the world and the feel of meeting the same character who build you up from the very first, it's exciting. Until I get into Crossbell, and finished 2 games of the arc only in 2 months. I caught up all the games right before Cold Steel 4 released on the west, had to wait until 3 years for Reverie, and now patiently waiting for Daybreak's release in less than a month. Yeay.
Also honestly I really hope the Sky remake rumours for after Daybreak ends up being true both because it gives me an excuse to rerun those games and because it's an easy way to finally just kill this argument while giving people the easy 3D entry point with all the bells and whistles.
I hope so too, but fear that it may get screwed up somehow. I have LOTS of nitpicky problems with the changes made for the Evolution versions, and I fear more would be made in a potential future remake.
@@uchytjes10 on the music side I would just hope they pull a Mario RPG and make the option of Classic and new soundtracks a thing, since the fandom is very particular about music, sometimes a bit exaggerated, sometimes accurate.
@@uchytjes10 I will until my dying day question the intelligence (or taste) of people who play the Sky games with the Evolution mod and use the Evo portraits option so they can see Estelle's quadrillion different expressions get downsized to about 12 or so. Or people who play with the Evo openings that essentially were a giant wink towards people who played the original games and giant FU to people who came in new.
There’s a comment I saw a while ago saying that they played the prologue chapters for Sky FC, Zero, and Cold Steel I to get an idea what the countries are, then went back to Sky. I kinda like that idea.
I played in release order, because during my time, only Sky SC was available on Steam. And for that same reason, I was forced to skip Zero and Azure till CS4 got announced in English. This is where I had a friend that strongly recommended me to play Zero and Azure before going in CS4 and I am truly happy to have followed that advice because it gave me more hype and enjoyment about the game.
Personally, I think that Sky FC is the best starting point, so that all the story threads make sense and you get all the emotional beats, with CS1 being the second best. Totally agree with you about Zero.
I loved Trails in the Sky so I would recommend anyone to start there simply because they are great games all on their own. People usually don't like to 'downgrade', so it's fitting with the narrative to start at the very beginning as the world itself grows and evolves alongside the technology used in the series. In some cases I prefer the 'simpler' Sky/Crossbell presentation over the more modern 3D, though there are moments in Hajimari where I think Falcom finally managed to achieve a quality in the cutscenes and animations where it is superior in presentation. Also, for the true completionists among us, I would recommend playing the entire Falcom lineup of games starting from Trails in the Sky to really get a full appreciation of what Falcom has been trying to gradually achieve with every project as a milestone.
In all honesty, in some ways the combat scenes in Sky FC and SC still haven't been surpassed. Even though a lot of the time it seemed like it was just two sprites hopping about, there were lots of cool little touches. Loewe jumping on top of Agate's sword Dark Link-style and using it as leverage to jump over him. Estelle doing a wall jump to jump over Kloe during the school play's finale. Cassius catching the tip of Julia's rapier with the tip of his bo staff during their practice session. Cassius planting his staff into the ground and doing a fulcrum kick to ward her off. Cassius meeting Julia in mid-air and drop-kicking her to the floor. Cassius brutally, brutally schooling Reverie if your BP was too low. Nothing in Cold Steel, not even in Reverie, could match that. During a large part of Cold Steel, we'd be lucky if the game just played those characters' standard combat craft animations. If not, the screen would fade to black and some battle sounds were played. Likewise, none of the talking animations in the 3D games can match the sheer expressiveness of many of Sky's dialogue portraits, Estelle's merely being the most prominent, but not the only example.
@@Erpy80 Well said, thank you for the addition - you've expressed my point in much greater detail than I did. I suppose I am charitable to Hajimari/Reverie since I am encouraged by the improved animations, but it goes to show just how much there is to like about Sky and older Falcom games in general.
It's funny that some people that complain about the "downgrade" often admit they also play pixelated games like Octopath Traveler, Stardew Valley, Star Ocean - The Second Story and so on. When confronted with that they often go suspiciously quiet. Personally I don't care about it. I played all games from Sky FC to Reverie, and had a great time with all of them. I agree that if you really want the full story and "get" all nuances, characters and relationships, there is no other way. That said - It does not really hurt that much if you start with Cold Steel I, but you miss out a lot of context. Starting with every other game is really not recommended. If you can start with Kuro is something I cannot say anything about, because I have not played that game yet. We are a few weeks away from that now, so it won't take that long (well - I have to finish that game first of course) before I can say anything about that...
I tend to look at it where as long as you go in knowing you’re not at the beginning and you’re okay with that (as sometimes people get it as a gift, or they’re getting what’s available to them due to restrictions on console or money or whatever), then if you play it and like it, then it’s ultimately that the series has found itself a new fan and there’s nothing wrong with that 😅 I don’t understand why people get really worked up about it. Is there an “optimal” way to play them? Ig, yeah, but ultimately it’s more important that people enjoy playing them imo
I'm in the camp of people who played the entirety of Cold Steel, and from there started from the very beginning. I then replayed it through reverie and I'm now on Daybreak. I love picking up on concepts and ideas retroactively. I saw your Let's Plays, so I'm not spoiling anything. I liked playing SC and understanding why Laura in the first Cold Steel has a gripe against jeagers. I loved seeing Prince Olivert put together class 7 based off his past adventures, and then seeing trials he's gone through in the first two arcs. I thought it was so cool how Kurt exerted himself to master the Vander dual style and then retroactively seeing why it's so highly regarded and how that rivals Laura's practice. The graveyard scene in CS3 with the flowers felt so satisfying when I saw Joshua's arc afterwards, and learning why Ash's arc was so significant by learning about Hamel made me appreciate his character more. In Daybreak there's a land the party visits that lines up with Scherazard's back story, and despite it not being confirmed I love that I could theorize about a character who hasn't been playable in years. I will say that as soon as you start playing Daybreak you will see how much love they give to characters we haven't seen in years, and this is by far the most rewarding game as far as callbacks go. There's one scene with sky characters and the main protagonist and you can see how much they respect their legacy, but you don't necessarily need to have played Sky to respect it.
But you have no idea how just how hard Loewe's graveyard scene in CS3 hit after playing every previous game, especially when that Sky music was going on in the background. Playing the games out of order just dampens the experience. Before I started playing Cold Steel 3 and 4 I had waa determined to figure out how to play Zero and Azure with a fan translation because I realized characters from that arc were going to be making more appearances and the Crossbell games weren't localized yet. It bothers me Falcom didn't give players in the west the opportunity to play the series in order. Fans jumping in now should be grateful they get to play them from the beginning but no they still insist on starting with Reverie or Daybreak because :shiny new game is better than ugly old game".
I started with Cold Steel 1, and loved it! Instead of going right into 2 (people probably know why I would have wanted to) I decided, "Im in this for the long haul, so I'm gonna play Sky now!" Glad I did! I'm about half-way through SC, and it's been a JOURNEY!!!!
Starting at FC: Ideal Starting at Zero: Weird but it could work Starting at Cold Steel 1: You'll miss some context and some reveals won't hit as hard but the story will still make sense Starting at Reverie/Kuro 1: You'll be spoiling the whole first saga for yourself effectively
Kuro 1 spoils relatively little all things considered. Kuro 2 and probably Kai are different stories. It’s probably a better start point than zero not considering the rest of their arcs
@@Aaronrules380 Yeah, I agree. Some "general world state" stuff will inevitably be spoiled of course, but Kuro generally avoids spoiling you outright about specific plot points or character stories and opts to just allude to stuff you're meant to know. It's a trade off between being spoiled and feeling a bit lost on the finer details of what the characters are talking about. I think the weirdest thing about playing Kuro first would be the disconnect of how much more the protagonist, Van, knows about world events than you do.
@@esuelle I feel that disconnect, and I played all the others! It's mostly when characters allude to other people, but the points stands. I can't imagine how confusing it must be for a newcomer. I blame the fan-translation, but deep down I know I'm just dumb.
@@Velerium I feel you, and you're probably not dumb :) ! I played all the other games twice and consider myself to know all the lore and events pretty well, but many times playing Kuro I had to stop and think for some time, "wait, who/what are they talking about here?". Since I have all the information I find that process pretty fun and satisfying, but a newcomer would have no chance. The roughness of the fan translation didn't help either. Japanese can be especially ambiguous when it comes down to the subject of a sentence, which gets amplified by rough and literal fan translations. I find that the official localizations put a lot more effort in removing excessive ambiguity. But just for the record, I'm super thankful for the fan translation, it was more than adequate for my first playthrough.
FC for the optimal experience. For as much as critics love to call it slow, it's also among the shortest in the series at about 50 or so hours, so it's not a terrible time investment if you find that it simply isn't for you. If anything, it's actually quite respectful with your time and doesn't need the kind of grinding later titles do with more inventories to manage or more knick knacks to collect.
I love that I started with Sky. And the more entries come out, the more apparent it becomes that it's just the right way to go about it. They mention stuff from all over constantly, and to fully understand it beyond just "Oh, that's a thing, and that's a place, and that's a person, and that sure is a word" you kinda need the prior knowledge. People can start where they want, but they need to be aware that the series spans over 10 games with a continuous plot, characters, all that. If they get confused, that's on them.
Definitely this. I started CS3 shortly after CS2 and when i met the certain characters you're referring to in that game I was a bit lost, had to google what was going on only to be told that revelation was exclusive to NG+ on CS2. It didn't really affect anything for me but it would have been nice to know beforehand lol.
IIRC it's a scene you get from collecting certain items in the game, and once you have them all you get a special scene from said characters which reveals more information about them, I just watched it on TH-cam. It's not worth playing the whole game again for what is a 5 minute scene. Once you've beat CS2 you might want to Google what the scene is, or just play the first few hours of CS3 and get the revelation there. It feels played down that way though.
@@weaponsci It's a series of notes (like 2 pages each) exclusive to NG+ that give you a special cut-scene if you gather them all. I recommend reading them all and then watching the cut-scene on youtube once you're done with CS2.
@@Chumbv There's probably videos showing the whole thing, from gathering the notes, turning them in with a certain character, getting decryptions of the notes to read and finally the scene that people refer to. I'd argue the contents of the notes are just as important as the final scene.
Without spoiling anything, Daybreak has A LOT of returning characters from all previous games (like more than 20). As well as connecting plot points that go way back, I would never in good faith recommend someone to start the series with it.
@@weaponsci More or less. Although if you don't know who they are, you are not really get screwed. Renne in Zero is gonna confuse you for example. Renne in Daybreak is simply meeting old friend.
I'd agree with this, however, some of the returning characters are definitely context spoilers for IF a player did start at Kuro and work backwards. Simply knowing their profession or that they end up in Calvard eventually may take a lot away from their story and emotional impact. Even Renne, knowing she's the really takes out any guess work about her arc in Sky/Crossbell.
Not exactly theirs pretty much only like 4 to 5 playable party members in BOTH current daybreak games in Japanese that aren't the CS 1 to 4 party members Kuro 2 only has like 17 total party members with 2 of them being limited to its version of the TRC dungeons and only AFTER you beat Daybreak 2.
I started with Cold Steel. Played all the way through 4. THEN went back to Sky and played the remaining in order. And my experience was AMAZING. I loved Sky even more knowing having played through the Cold Steel Arc. Already knowing the Sky FC twist made so many interactions in that game crazy interesting. Knowing how certain characters got their beginnings was so great to see how far she had come. It did not lessen the experience in any way at all, and in fact, I think only helped my personal playthrough. And that is partly because of how I view spoilers. Generally speaking of course, because as with everything, there is no such thing as a “one size fits all” view. For me, spoilers are meaningless. There is no such thing as a spoiler without context. And to be clear, despite my personal opinion on the topic, I still try not to spoil others being aware of the general opinion on the subject. So knowing what would happen and hearing all about the events from Sky SC only made me excited to experience them with a different context. Without context, a spoiler is meaningless. So knowing a thing happens is VASTLY different from seeing the build-up and watching the story build to the thing. I maintain, a good story cannot be ruined by a spoiler, it only changes the context. Whereas if you think the spoiler ruined the story, then you don’t think the story was very good. It was just a shocking twist for you to talk about. Now, with all that being said. Of course the ideal spot to start the series is Sky FC. It’s the intended beginning of the story. But I would never call people who started the story differently wrong, or say their experience was inferior. It’s just a different experience.
Totally agree. We need to stop this there is only one way to play BS. We should be asking the person questions about them to personalize the answer and give them options. Gameplay is almost never talked about in these type of videos and for large number of people it can be very important. For people like that starting with CS would be a good place to enter the world of Trails.
No offense but "starting with the new shiny games" is basically what most of the current Western Trails fanbase did when they started with CS1 (the 6th entry) not sure why it would be a problem only now, and i honestly feels there's some selfish motivations behind the gatekeeping than any real good intentions actually (there is for sure, but some people are trying to hide behind those while being intentionally deceptive), the fact that a lot of current "fans" were celebrating for the loss of profit once Daybreak/Kuro didn't sell well in Japan was already self explanatory to me, some people obviously just wants the Calvard arc to bomb in the west too so they decided to hop on that little crusade more than ever since the time Falcom started to move on to something else than Rean/Cold Steel, i do have some theories about it (including those "anti-woke/anti-localisation, anti-NISA"), and it mostly regard all the "new changes" the arc in question has made to the serie, and to be honest, it has just gone back to it's roots overall (the bigger change would be the action gameplay and the possibility to move freely in turn based mode) for me it just looks like the whole Gundam SEED Destiny debacle where a lot of "fans" made noises just because it wasn't about Kira Yamato anymore, i'm pretty sure you won't hear much noises if Rean become a lot more relevant again in Kai no Kiseki, Kiseki/Trails are about Zemuria first but seems some people got "too attached" to some protagonists. I personally started Sky FC with the japanese version on the PSP (and it's been that way for a while now, i do purchase the western products as supportive gesture though) and that's where my Trails/Kiseki journey started, but if people wants to start with an arc starter i'll always say, "yeah sure, have fun, welcome to the Kiseki/Trails series by the way" while warning them that the series has a lot of dialogues and that they needs to be invested enough to enjoy it, it will be a bit different if they wants to start in the middle of an arc though, where i'll just try to politely convince them to at least play the start of the arc they wants to play, for example if someone want to go for Crossbell my answer will be "Zero", same if people want to start with Erebonia my answer will be "CS1" (which also can spoil a bit of stuff concerning Sky and Zero/Azure but again "strangely" no one dare to mention this), obviously the "ideal" way to start is Sky FC and the worst place to start is Reverie for anyone as long as they haven't got into the Liberl, Crossbell and Erebonia arc, after all it's an epilogue title for the 3 arcs we got while being a subtle introduction to the new one, the reason it was called "Hajimari" in Japan in the first place. Also Loewe is the MVP and no one will ever come close, (except Arianrhod and Mcburn, i'm more of an Uroboros enjoyer personally) well, Crow's got the look at least.
While I do indeed have some criticisms toward NISA, it has never gotten to the point where I have intentionally wanted a certain game to bomb (provided it was good, and I've yet to be disappointed by a Trails game). As I said in the video, I try not to be too dickish about it, and I understand that there are many who do take things too far.
I started on cold steel 3 on switch. I spent about 30-45 minutes reading the in game synopsis of the first 2 games in that series and it still pulled me in. I am sure I would have enjoyed the others as well
Great video Weapons. I'm on the same page as you. Keeping it very vague because I don't want to speak too much of Daybreak but just to offer my 2 cents as someone that has played it already, you *can* start with it (or any other start point) and have a lot of fun and even fall in love with the franchise. BUT you absolutely need to be ready to have things fly over your head or confuse you every other dialogue box, and not understanding what the characters are alluding to half the time will for sure make the story less enjoyable as a whole, although if you go in with the right mindset that could work as a nice motivator to go back to the older games and fill in the missing puzzle pieces of your understanding. Anyway. For anyone that isn't allergic to older games, just start at Sky. They're great and I wish I could play them again for the first time. I could say more but I'd just be recapping the video 😅
Since Zero and Azure became readily available in the west last year, you can finally play the series in order. So I'd always tell people to start with Sky.
First off, the the potential stranger who is not already familiar with the series who actually is confused about where to start: The people who tell you to start with sky FC are not gatekeeping. They are simply eager for MORE fans to enjoy the series they love as much as possible just like they love the series. That's the opposite of gatekeeping. That's... tour-guiding, or something. The people who accuse us of gatekeeping are in fact the toxic people. They hurl irrelevant insults and are going out of their way to damage other people's enjoyment of the series. Playing the games out of order isn't only about understanding or not understanding everything. It's also about getting the proper emotional payoff. I'm honestly the least sensitive person I know when it comes to disliking spoilers. You can tell me some major character dies in a story and it wont bother or ruin the experience for me because my brain is completely wired to enjoy the journey, not the destination. Despite this, I still think some of the most powerful, emotional moments in the series will fall flat if you play out of order. Zero is quite possibly the most significant example of this. For the love of god please don't play zero before sky, not because I want to gatekeep you out of the series, but because I want you to love the games as much as possible. I can understand wanting to start from Cold steel because new folks might have a hard time enjoying an old 2d game, I can accept this, and just ask they keep their minds open to sky as they play cold steel. Just don't play zero before sky, and yeah, don't criticize t he story to newcomers of the series if you decided to chop your experience in half and start mid-way thru. I have more to say about those people who toss the label 'gatekeeper' around, but youtube will autodelete my message I'm sure.
See, personally I started with Reverie. At the time I only had a switch and none of the sky trilogy or cs1-2 were on switch(still aren't) and I decided to say fuck it. I regret absolutely nothing. Since then I've gotten a ps5 so I can atleast play cs1 and 2.
@deathking9278 you might "regret nothing" now, but the reality is, you don't know what you're missing or robbing yourself of until it's too late. Simply knowing that certain characters aren't dead, or ended up in certain countries or jobs by Reverie, will absolutely undermine the emotional journey of their arcs when you do eventually go back. I think that's what the original commenter meant. It's not that you won't have fun playing. And even if things don't make sense, they will eventually. It's the fact that the narrative was written with the emotional impact in mind, and playing the games any way other than release order inherently diminishes that.
Great video. You're doing Adios' work! Also, I'm a firm believer that the only acceptable answer to the question of "where should I start playing Trails"? Is Trails in the Sky FC. The entire thing that separates Trails from other RPGS is the world building and overarching story. If you skip all of that so that you can play the "newest game with the shiniest graphics" you're missing the entire point of the series. Just go play FF7 remakes. Trails is not about shiny graphics. It's about the biggest and best overarching narrative in gaming, and starting anywhere but the beginning robs you of that experience. It's not toxic gatekeeping to advocate that position.
I 100% agree with you, I think the best way for people to understand the situation is to change the form of media, you wouldn't start the 3rd book in a series, you wouldn't start the 5th season of a TV show, you wouldn't watch the direct sequel to a movie, so why skip multiple games? Though I do recognise that as amazing trails is, it's not for everyone. If you can't convince someone that skipping multiple games worth of world building, character development, political intrigue, and so forth is bad, I don't think trails is for them. The one opposition I have is I think you were too critical of NISA towards CS III, yes they did market CS III as an entry point, but that was because Falcom said it themselves so I don't think NISA can be completely at fault. As to why Falcom said it was an entry point, I think they realised CS had major success because of the soft reset to the series so they advertised CS III as an entry point to boost sales, even though it's possibly the second to worst entry point in the whole series.
I just tell people to start with FC but if they can't handle the older graphics try cold steal because it's easier entry point then circle back around if the games are for you and the newest game isn't the best place to start because you will be lost and confused for awhile and not get much build up for some of the characters stories
Funny thing is I started by picking up cold steel 1 on steam and only played about 10 minutes. Stopped and went to the Internet to see why I haven't heard about this interesting game and found out I should start with fc since personally that's the way I would prefer playing it as I love a good long story. So I got lucky I didn't keep going but while playing fc I just couldn't wait to get to the graphical level of the cold steel series. And what ended up happening was that I got to the crossbell games and found out I had to wait for them 😂 but I got lucky I only had to wait about a month or two.
I feel bad for whoever accidentally started in games like Sky the 3rd, Reverie or one of the sequel games. Cause you know it's gotta have happened to someone at some point.
For me it doesn't matter where you start. But importantly the timing where you have been hooked by the game. Like for me I started playing the Trails when I buy PSVita way back 2016 and my first was Trails Of Cold Steel 1. Once I finished the game since it was a cliff hanger, I wanted more to know about, that's why I search the previous games and so on but Zero/Azure were not available in the West yet. In the next year and so on I finished them all up until Trails Into Reverie and I am collecting all of the Collector's Edition from Xseed/NISA :) Long story short, luckily the new comers now is welcome to start either from Liberl, Crossbell, Erebonia or Calvard. Falcom fans here!
I _did_ start with Sky FC, and I _did_ play all (western available) games in chronological order. With the huge amount of story, world-building and background information that are presented throughout the games, I would say you will inevitable missing a lot of references if you don't play it in order... and you will be missing out on some great games if you skip previous titles completely. But I would also say that this isn't a real problem with all the resources that we have at hand today. If you want to understand some specific thing that came up in a game... you can look it up on the fansites. If you want to get a general overview of the previous stories... there are summaries available. If you want to experience the games without having to play them yourself... there are a lot of good Let's Play series out there. I wouldn't recommend starting with an explicit sequel title - like Sky 3rd, CS IV or even Reverie (which basically is Cold Steel 5+Crossbell 3)... but you can start with every single arc, and work backward from there as desired, or not. The only real reason I would still advise to start with Sky FC is mechanical. Inevitably, the games have improved and been enhanced in terms of pure playability as well as the introduction of new mechanics. Getting back from something like Reverie to Sky, or even CS1 can feel clunky and a bit lacking. This "problem" would not occur if you played in order... building upwards instead of down, and enjoy the new features, the changed or improved graphics. Though I know and understand that there are a lot of people out there, especially in the RPG and JPRG fandoms, who love to play the classics, and I have to say for myself that I still prefer the graphics style of Sky and Crossbell over the later entries. But all in all... I think the question of "where should I start Trails?" is a lot less important than "should I start Trails?" There can only be one answer to that: yes, you should. Whereever you want. It's an amazing journey.
you wouldnt look up tita or agate just because you see them in cold steel 3 or who is estelle when they dont know they are important if you start there.
One thing you didn't really bring up is that while most "first games" are decent entry points to some degree, follow-up games often start dropping references much more liberally, often under the assumption that people who played an entry point game got hooked and decided to start from the beginning of the franchise before jumping into the follow-up game. Azure's trade conference chapter was an excellent example. Cold Steel II has a section where it walks up to players who haven't played the Crossbell games, delivers a little cut, takes several Weissmanns worth of salt and then starts rubbing and rubbing and rubbing and rubbing. You'll know it when you see it. And you'll feel for us poor souls who had to play through that part with no external context. Many long-time players don't really MEAN to "gatekeep" (I think the word is used a bit too liberally in this debate), but they want people to understand that this franchise is NOT like Tales or Final Fantasy and rather than just wanting people to experience the games they way they did, they want people to experience the games the way they wish they did. (many really long-time fans never played Crossbell before the first two Cold Steel games because Zero and Azure weren't playable in English at all, not through official means and not through unofficial means either at that point, but they wish they did) I occasionally wonder if some "anti-gatekeeper" venom is simply rooted in good ol' console warring. Like, the three Sky games are only available on PC, people like their Sony console, so they're not gonna recommend people picking up games on another platform. (and then probably sticking to that platform for the rest of the franchise)
Regarding the last paragraph, it is absolutely what you speculate. Some people just refuse to play on pc, and take as many excuses as they can to not do that. Some admit it's the reason, some don't. If you ask me, they should just make an exception, dust off an old pc, and give the GOG version of the sky trilogy a go.
I played the Sky trilogy, then Zero (with the Geofront patch), and by the time I was done with Zero, the Geofront patch for Azure had been taken down and the agreement with NIS America had been announced. So, I played Cold Steel 1 and 2, then Zero again (official NIS localization), and then Azure (finally), then Cold Steel 3 and 4, and then Reverie. So I played it pretty close to release order, with only Azure not being in the right spot. Playing in release order is preferred, I do agree that Sky FC and Cold Steel 1 are the two best entry points (haven't played Daybreak yet, so no comment).
Remakes in the same way Zero and Azure Kai (or the western PC/Switch versions) are remakes. I seriously doubt they will redo the visuals, revise the story, or touch the gameplay in any significant way.
I started with Zero and had no problem playing the game or understanding anything. And it's become my fav game. Then I went from Azure to CS3 and loved that game too. Anything I was curious about was explained in the story summary the game itself provides. And when I wanted to know more I looked it up with a quick Google search. Eventually went back to play CS1 and had fun seeing the details. Personally I just have never had an issue with story order.
Generally, yeah. Sky is the obvious best place to start with. But something I've noticed while browsing the internet is there are a lot of people that are leery to commit to a 20 year old game. Cold Steel 1 and 2 are definitely a viable alternative to them with the hopes that after falling in love with the setting and characters they'll be more receptive to going back and trying the older games. Plus you have all those who don't want to game on a PC. Daybreak will be the same way, although that game is massively shaped by the events of CS4 and Reverie, so imo it's a little less viable compared to CS1. Plus there are people who bounce hard off the gameplay of FC, which is understandable considering how slow that game is.
Really appreciate the video. Trails is such a great series and I would love to see more people get into it. You’re absolutely right about starting at an arc other than Sky. You’re gonna have to accept some stuff is going to fly over your head. That was my experience starting the series with Cold Steel. I don’t regret starting where I did though. This series has my favorite turn based combat and character build mechanics of all time. I don’t think I would have stuck around if I started with the Sky arc, because the mechanics were much more simple. I’m a gameplay over story kind of person though.
Hi I watched nicoB’s playthrough of sky fc, got invested in it and impatient enough for videos to come out that I binge watched someone else’s playthrough of the sky trilogy, is it fine if I start with trails from zero?
Honestly, the way I see it, is that this whole beef seems to come from the fact that people want to be part of the "conversation" so badly, that they want to play the Shiny New Thing despite knowing the series is chronological. To be real, it's not worth it. The only experience that matters is your own. So from that vein, if you can at all, my recommendation is still playing chronologically from Sky FC. Don't treat it like a race to get to the newest game, it's more like a marathon. Take your time and enjoy the ride. Once you do get to the newer games it'll be much more worth it, trust me. It reminds me of people who refuse to read One Piece because it's 'too long'. But like....so what? Why does that deter you? Because you want to be caught up as fast as possible so you can be a part of the 'conversation' right? Just read it, man.
I agree that sky will always be the best starting point, but I also think people overestimate how much not understanding everything will always effect an experience. Like Dragonball Z literally starts on a team up of former enemies and dramatic shift of understanding of the lead’s origins that won’t really come through if you started with it, but DBZ also caught on in the west despite being released before Dragonball. And back when I was a kid watching anime through reruns was super common, which meant you were often missing episodes and going out of order just due to tv schedules
I do recall that. Yeah you're right. That was actually my exact experience with Dragon Ball, even. It also reminds me of my experience with Digimon back in the day. Whenever it came on TV, they'd rerun seasons 1-4 every night. Once they aired the last episode of season 4, they'd circle back to season 1, and this was done until season 5 came out and they were ready to air that. Because of this, season 4 was the first season I saw, and because of this, I thought the cast turning into the Digimon power rangers/sentai style was normal, and was a bit weirded out when I tuned in for season 1 and that group of characters had partner Digimon. It wasn't until I got to season 3 that I realized having the Digimon digivolve and the kids stand around was the norm, and season 4 was the exception, not the rule.
@@weaponsci The thing is, the best stories understand that what they show you is just one particular period in the characters' lives. There were and always will be stories before and afterwards. I'm pretty sure Trails is one of those stories; Estelle was a pretty blank slate, but Joshua had a whole life before we met him. As did Schera, and Zin, and Olivier, and Cassius, etc. In fact, I'm coming round to the idea that Zero isn't a bad starting point after all. You get this side story about 2 good-hearted people pursuing a deeply traumatized child in order to show her love and acceptance, and I think that could be a complete and satisfying story on its own. And you could then play Sky and see how they met, or what happened to the child to traumatize her.
I think another reason is that DBZ was designed as a weekly manga first before an anime. If you are reading the weekly Shonen Jump it has to capture the readers attention even in the middle of a series. Akira Toriyama was an expert in immediately grabbing your attention with the structure of his pages and art. So a good majority of manga have to be self contained to be enjoyed as a solo experience while having an overarching goal (this of course subjective and varies). There are probably many people who started in the middle of a manga or anime and went back and watched/read it from the beginning I know I did.
@@obba40 yeah that what I meant my earliest exposure to Dragonball was DBZ on toonami there was no easily available manga or anime websites (I didn’t even know what the internet was). The first time I saw it was near the end of the Frieza saga (Goku had turned Super Saiyan and five minute countdown had begun). Ideally yes engaging with the narrative from the beginning is the best but back then in the late 90s early 2000s we really did not have that luxury. Yeah I’m very grateful people can enjoy Dragonball from the beginning cause the fight with Jackie Chun is one of my favorites.
Yes Sky is painfully slow but no one has ever regretted pushing through it because everything in trails pays off in the end and honestly forty hours isn’t a very long time anymore when it comes to games. I finished all Sky FC to 3rd and Cold Steel 1-4 in two years (including a very long pause when my laptop went kaput) My husband just replayed Sky FC and finished in 25 hours with a guide, not to mention how helpful (however broken) turbo mode is and you don’t need a top of the line pc to play it runs on a potato. That’s all why I’m a Sky purist because you end up playing trails for the story so FC should always be the start
I get starting with games out of order, especially when so many series these days aren’t so tightly connected. (Theres no real reason to play an elder scrolls or fallout game in order for example, since they’re only loosely connected) I had friends back in the day that started mass effect with 3 because it was new and that bought into the hype. But i feel like I enjoyed it way more because i played them in order at each game’s release. Especially because I had imported saves. Sky being only available on PC does also change some things. I’m only just now starting trails, and I decided to start with Sky FC and to go in release order. I just hit chapter 3 of FC last night before i went to bed. I’m having an absolute blast. I do find it *slightly* odd that people are unwilling to start the trails series with older titles because of graphics though. I totally get wanting more modern systems, especially in a action battle system game…but for turn based I don’t really get it. Older action games often have much clunkier combat systems and controls that don’t feel great. But turn based doesn’t really change much. I know daybreak has the new hybrid system, and I totally get its appeal, but you’re still going to be doing a lot of fights with the turn based option, so it hard to picture that being the deal breaker. I can admit, I’m very used to older games and graphics and that graphics are typically the last thing i take into consideration when buying a game. Don’t get me wrong, it’s definitely nice to have, but i don’t think I’ve bought a game just for the graphics, or not bought one because of the graphics, since i was maybe an early teenager but that was probably only a few rare occasions. I feel like it needs to be about the FUN FACTOR first and foremost. Sometimes that can mean the gameplay, sometimes it can mean the story. Both influence if you’re having a good/fun time. Its hard to think of visuals being the reason you aren’t having fun. I know people say that they don’t want to start with sky fc because its “slow” but i really don’t agree at all. It definitely takes its time, but absolutely nothing so far has been done without reason. Every slow moment where Estelle and Joshua take time to just live in the world and the moment feels so incredibly purposeful and it’s honestly my favorite part of this series so far. The combat also feels incredibly modern for a psp game from 2004. The turn based is semi fast paced, has plenty of modern convinces, and has enough depth to keep you engaged but isn’t overly complicated. I’m by no means a JRPG fan, and have only played a handful of them, and finished even less, but this game series is already something incredibly special and unique and implore people (even people who have never played a jrpg) to give this series a chance. It’s legitimately a beautiful piece of art.
I played all of Sky, then CS1 and CS2, "found" a way to play all of Crossbell, then CS3, 4, then Reverie. The ONLY reason I didn't play in order is because Crossbell wasn't out in English when I played. After very spoilery events that simultaneously occur in Azure and CS2 and when I saw the beginning of the Epilogue for CS2, I knew I had to play Crossbell. So far, I've invested nearly a 1000 hours into this series, and despite my issues with Cold Steel 4's ending, Reverie was enough to reignite my passion. Start in the beginning is my advice.
It's funny how the answer can simply be "if you care about knowing the whole story from start to finish, start with Sky. If you don't, it's not a big deal where you start" and yet people still feel the need to argue. I say this having started with CS I/II, not knowing anything about Trails, and my enjoyment of those games wasn't bothered one bit. Actually those games motivated me to go back and play the older ones, which wouldn't have happened if I wasn't introduced to the series first through Cold Steel. I do agree tho out of all the arcs, Crossbell is prolly the last one you'd want to start with. Not only do those do games run concurrent with the first two Cold Steel games, so you're missing just as much on that end as if you started with Cold Steel, but like you said, you get spoiled on the ending to three of the most important character arcs from Sky. But yeah we as Trails fans are pretty spoiled cause in the end, Falcom does such a good job in handling each arc so that any one of them would make a good entry point to the series.
In my opinion starting from the newest shiniest arc is fine. This was my case, i went in completely blind into cold steel 1, which was the newest arc at that point. And enjoyed it so much i decided to play the whole series after, because i actually wanted to know more. You should be reasonable to the people who aproach this franchise. It has 10+ games, more than 500+ hours of gameplay. If you point a new player to go and play old games he might not enjoy the mechanics of it and drop the whole series right there. But that desire to know more after playing new games will make them stick around and actually sit down and play those games.
I think the concern people have is that CS1 (and even CS1+2), are by far the least problematic new arc starts that aren't FC, given that CS3 was pitched as a soft arc reset and Zero has Sky characters all over it. I haven't played Daybreak and so I don't know, but given past experience it could range from "eh, it's a decent place to start" to "holy shit, it spoils everything before it and is very confusing for new players". On top of that, it has been increasingly common in Trails for the latter half of arcs to focus much more on the overarching series story, which means you often reach a breaking point in the new arc (CS3+, for example) where it is highly suggested for you to go back and play the previous arc, which can be annoying. I honestly don't know how to resolve this issue, as it is already *a lot* to ask players to play Sky and Crossbell for CS3+, and I understood that people don't want to go through all that trouble. But, unfortunately, many of the Trails games just expect you to have played everything and there's no getting around it.
@@Dahras1 When I started Cold Steel I went completely blind, knowing absolutely nothing about trails as a whole. I just picked the first game in the trilogy (4's wasn't out in the west at that point). When I got to CS2 and its end (which I agree would be confusing for someone who never played or at least heard about Zero/Ao) I did my research caught up a little, read some stuff, learned that there are two arcs before cold steel. I knew who Lloyd and Rixia were when I got to that part. I would advise new players to do some research and then deciding either they want to see it themselves or not. Every entry to each arc did a good job of worldbuilding up to this point. I would assume daybreak does it too (haven't played it yet, either). And even if you started at Zero, meet characters from Sky, Falcom did a good job introducing them. Sure you miss that hype of meeting them in a new game, watching how their stories continued, but realistically it's not that big of a deal if you just try to get into the series. Again, Falcom does an excellent job of introducing those characters and make you want to go back and check it yourself. Before trails, I was very picky about retro JRPGs, but the series changed me. And Cold Steel which is a pretty weak arc compared to the rest managed to do it. So i say put more trust into new players and the games themselves. And the spoilers you might get aren't the end of the world in my opinion. And like you might catch a spoiler even if you play in release order like Azure clearly spoils which side wins in CS2, and that’s a big one kinda. Should we recommended people playing Azure and CS2 at the same time then? That's just silly.
I guess I'll offer a bit of a take that does favour the skippers? We'll see. I do think that if you can starting with Sky FC is ideal but I also think that Cold Steel 1 is also the 2nd best starting point. Sky FC is obvious so I won't go into detail on it but Cold Steel 1 is still early enough into the series that you don't lose out on a whole lot of things that have happened prior (and Falcom does provide context regarding things that happened in Liberl/Crossbell that are relevant to Erebonia in each game) and as CS keeps going, you're filled in more on what happened outside of Erebonia. This comes at the cost of events that happen in CS that have ties to Liberl/Crossbell having less impact but the trade off is favourable enough that XSEED went ahead with localizing Cold Steel 1 and 2 after SC as FC/SC provided enough context that CS1-2 didn't fly completely over your head while SC and Zero/Azure's key plot points are still referenced. The Intermission with the SSS in CS2 also helps maintain interest on the player's part to go back and play Crossbell. Which happens to be my position as someone who has been playing the games on release (Sky FC, SC, CS1, CS2, Sky 3rd, CS3, CS4, Zero, Azure, Reverie, Dawnbreak). You zoomers being able to play the games in chronological order, back in my day we had to skip entire arcs! Ultimately though it's up to the player. If they want to start anywhere but they know they're going to miss shit, more power to them. I'll still suggest either Sky FC or if that's too old, CS1.
Even if we disregard story, there's also an argument to be made in terms of gameplay. Over time, new arcs have added several brand new features and Quality of Life additions to enhance the gameplay. Playign through the games out of order might dampen your enjoyment of it. Especially if, disregarding story for a moment, you play the games within the same arc out of order. Try going through Nord again in CS1 without the fast travel function of CS2 and you'll see what I mean.
I got into Trails in 2017 with CS1 and 2, then played Sky, then took a long break and started again from the Crossbell games, simply because I've never messed with fan translations. Now I'm resuming from CS3 and going in order. People getting into it now are lucky to have all the games available. Having the gaps filled in as you play out of order has some "aha" moments, but if I could go back I'd have started from Sky because you can experience the weight of every callback and returning character. I also get that CS1 might be a better introduction for people who haven't played many hardcore JRPGs before going back to the 2D ones once hooked. At least they're doing 3D remakes of the Sky games for the zoomers.
This video perfectly encapsulates my feelings entirely. I just don't understand why fans are considered toxic for simply wanting people to experience the story how it was intended. This literally never happens in any other form of media that has direct sequels. That time period during KH3 was abysmal. People just hate committing to anything I guess. It's just common sense to me that if you want to get into something you start at the beginning. Especially if it's a series that connects over multiple games/books/anime etc. The fanbase really needs to stop treating the Sky games as if they're these horribly ancient pieces of tech from an ancient civilization that are the worst games to ever exist. What game from that era (or hell even today) has a Turbo mode? That alone significantly reduces the amount of time spent on the more mundane aspects like backtracking and level grinding. I have to question if some of these fans even like Trails, or if they just like one very specific aspect of it. Long form storytelling is something that should be praised, especially when done insanely well like what Falcom has managed to do with freaking 12 (soon to be 13) of these things 😂
A wild Cyrus sighting? My lucky day! But seriously, I played through Sky through Reverie over the past couple years and loved pretty much every minute ( please let Kevin be main protag in an Arteria game, Falcom ) but I can see how someone born this millennium can be unkind to the graphics in Sky, the gameplay is primo, even today. In fact, people were head over heels for Octopath Traveler a few years ago but I got pretty bored of how simplistic the combat was 50ish hours in and haven't been back yet.
TBF Sky did come out in like 2004, and 2011 for the west. In internet timeline might as well be the middle ages and 1800s respectively. But yeah, I see what you're saying, and I do agree.
In all honesty, the original Sky games didn't have Turbo mode. Heck, the original XSeed releases on PC didn't even have it. The feature was first introduced when Durante ported Cold Steel 1 to the PC and when fans mentioned the Sky games could really used that feature too, Sara Leen implemented it into the Sky games, around the time of the 3rd's release. (before that, lots of PC players used a cheat engine to simulate Turbo)
@@weaponsci a remake would def fix that specific issue if they do end up switching to 3D, I'm very curious to see how that would function. Especially the old orbment system.
I started the whole franchise with Cold Steel One. That worked pretty good until Cold Steel III. That is the game where all the previous chapters and protagonists and places come together again. Technically already with Cold Steel II. Without spoiling too much. After the credits there is a playable 3 hour epilogue and you start questioning yourself whi these characters are. But in Cold Steel III the nods and connections to older games go ape. It started with a big Arc that puts Rean and his Party into Crossbell where Trails from Zero and Azure plays. And later it even goes into Trails in the Sky territory when you visit Liberl From Sky 1 to 3 with so many refrerences that you have the feeling you are missing too many things to follow up to. So what i did was... Stopped after Cold Steel III and started Trails in the Sky from 1 to 3. Now currently i´m digging into Zero and Azure. After that i will watch a quick summary of III where i probably start to feel very nostalgic and then i finally after one and a half year break i can finish the saga with Cold Steel IV. 🤣 But references aside. The stories alone are worth digging through the old games. So many great stories so many awesome characters. The games also aged like wine and are still good even when 5 Games use an Engine with prerendered 2D Characters in a 3D Area.
For best story experience, start with Sky FC. If graphic matters much to you, start with Reverie/CS/Daybreak whichever you want, just do you, as long as you enjoy the game. But if you feel lost in stories because you start with later entries, just watch weapon’s ‘let’s talk about trails series’ Sky FC, SC, the Third, Zero and Azure for some input so you know what’s going on. I started with FC on PSP and have to wait years for SC too came out on steam. Worth the wait.😄
I don't think Twitter people know what gatekeeping is. A gatekeeper would not tell them the best way to enjoy something; a gatekeeper would, for whatever reason, tell them they should not play the games at all. I am mainly a console gamer and started with FC late last year. Played in my potato laptop that literally dies in 5 minutes if not constantly plugged in and I had a great time. Currently on chapter 1 of Zero. I had this great little moment at the beginning of Zero when opening the first 3 chests. This moment would mean nothing to me had I not played the series. Plus, a potential Trails fan is probably aware that the games build off of one another. Knowing that, unless it is absolutely a hardware issue, why start elsewhere but release order? People that really want to start with Daybreak are probably better off starting waiting to see if the Sky games get remade. Especially those without PCs or that really want the entire series in the same console.
Yeah, I also started with Cold Steel 1 and the end of Cold Steel 2 felt like a good point to go back and play the Sky series, then the Crossbell games came out in the west and it just felt natural to play them before going back to Cold Steel. Just knowing all of those characters made CS3+4 so much better even when I had already forgotten some of the plotpoints of Sky FC by the time I went into CS3. Not every brain will remember every little detail. But you will remember when the game reminds you. Still have to finish Reverie, but I don't really like that as much as the other games from a gameplay and narrative point. It feels very disconnected, much like Sky 3rd. Pretty much a giant infodump to cross the bridge between the end of CS4 and the beginning of the next big arc. I don't really think we needed another game that centered around Class VII and the SSS. Not really feeling compelled to continue playing at the moment.
I started with the Sky arc. Sky the 3rd is still one of my favorite games for now. But the problem I see with just starting from one of the newer arcs is the fact that the later games in the arc will become another Avengers endgame with lots of older characters appearing for the big fight that will have 0 impact if you didn:t play the older games first. Cold Steel and Daybreak are apparently standalone enough to start with but only the first game in the arc. Cold Steel 2 is not that standalone actually because of reasons and those reasons cause confusion for some players who play the game without having played the first 2 arcs. It is kinda hard for new players to get into the series because of that, but it is a continued story that is told through all these games and especially a certain character from the first arc has their story told throughout the entire series. Trails is basically a light novel series divided into multiple parts in game format that tells one story. And it makes no sense to read a light Novel from the middle of the story. To be fair, I did that with Shield Hero volume 11 but it was the only Volume I had access to at the time. But still, most stories should be read from the start. It is just so much more rewarding than needing to go back after the first book anyway to know what is even happening. I do hope Daybreak gets people invested enough that they turn their gears and think to themselves that they have to play Sky now to get the whole story. Because having the whole story makes everything better.
Like I always say in this argument, Starting Trails anywhere other than with Sky, is like starting The Lord of The RIngs from The Two Towers... you could, you will enjoy it because the books are awesome, but the highs won't be as high for you and the lows will more easily grate at you. That is it. You will enjoy it, just not as much.
Yeah that's another good point. For most arcs the sequel(s) for sure will bring in important points from previous arcs. So you'll have to backtrack anyway.
I started at Cold Steel and that was fine in my opinion. Obviously starting with Sky would be optimal but Cold Steel is good. I think Zero and Azure is alot harder to start from for the sole reason that they include Estelle and Joshua and Renne in their plot, so you could be a little lost with the characters. Not sure about Daybreak, looking forward to playing that.
I'm on haitus for continuing the series atm after finishing every game up through CS4 (just gotten really busy finishing up my degree) My two cents is that it is fine to start with the first game of an arc. you'll be eased into the world of Zemuria but you will miss refferences and miss out on some of the details on some plot points that started from earlier games. Its not the ideal play order. If you can play Sky start with Sky FC. but if you say, only have a switch, Zero is a fine starting point even if you won't feel the full weight of some of the late game story events. You'll be told enough to at least be invested in it (even if the full payoff won't be felt). However I will put my foot down and say you do need to play every game prior to CS3 before playing CS3. It is not ideal, but Zero is a much better starting point for Switch players than CS 3, 4 or Reverie. (Can't speak on Daybreak yet)
Are there really people who can defend with a straight face starting anywhere but the very beginning? It isn't even a "gatekeeping" thing, I don't follow anyone on Twitter or anywhere for that matter who's part of the "community". It's just back-asswards to me to jump into a decade+ long multi-layered, deeply intertwined story right in the middle.
Yep, quite a few. To those people, the suggestion to start at the beginning is akin to suggesting that people learn a new language in order to watch a single non-translated anime. "You really want to force the chore of someone watch 500+ hours of earlier games just so they can try a game they might be interested in? Gatekeeping!" From this point of view, only the latest games are worth playing (because 3D graphics) and earlier games are treated as a chore forced on people. (like having to clean your room before you can go and play outside) Meanwhile the long-time fans who propose starting at square one consider the earlier games an enjoyable experience, so in their eyes, they're not forcing homework on new players, but rather experiences that can be just as charming and enjoyable as the later installments.
@@Erpy80 hot take: Cold Steel 1, while I do love the game, fits the "chore" description way more than Sky FC for the simple fact that it follows a similar formula but is almost twice as long.
@@weaponsci Cold Steel III has a similar structure and I'd very surprised if that wasn't also true for Daybreak I. It's simply the way Falcom introduces the gameworld piece by piece. Zero was an outlier because it took place in a relatively small city-state rather than a larger country with several cities and villages spread all over the place, but Zero's approach of having a city-state that's open from pretty early on had its own downside (for both the writers and plenty of players) of the NPC-runs between plot events becoming insanely long, which can get a real pacing killer.
For whoever reading this. Dont make the same mistake as i did. Dont start somewhere else than sky fc. I started with Cold steel 1, i had fun, but I felt there was always something missing and about mid game, where they were constantly kept talking about some “bracers” i said enough and went to sky FC, it took some time eto adjust to the old style game, but now i am on Sky SC and i am loving it. I still dont understand, why i have to press button to confirm every single dialog line (honestly the only thing i hate), to the point my hand hurts already, but the story and characters are so fricking good. Start with SKY FC. End of story. Don’t kill the story for yourself!
Yeah it's a double edge sword. Trails is an investment like One Piece. Most people want instant gratification and Trails is not that. So every so often, you'll get a heap of new people asking "Do you I have to play the previous games to play the new one?" It's the most annoying question and it's so often asked. My recommendation is to liken the Trails metaseries to Marvel comics. Each arc is it's own team. Sky, Azure/Zero, Cold Steel and Daybreak is like Avengers, Xmen, GOTG, Defenders. As an Xmen fan, that's where I started. But the Avengers came first and is referenced in Xmen. But I don't care about the Avengers enough to read it. My enjoyment comes from Xmen. In the case of Trails, I played Sky FC didn't like it. I then played CS1 when it was released in the US and loved it. I played CS2 and then went back to Azure/Zero. I didn't finish the Sky trilogy until right before CS4 was released. I had a roundabout adventure with the series. When I played Zero, and Estelle & Joshua were introduced I had the same reaction as Lloyd and the SSS. "Who the hell are these fuckers?" For me that enhanced my experienced of Zero/Azure. And it made me curious as to why Estelle and Joshua were held in such high regard in the game. Sky FC was not my favorite but I powered through. Sky SC was incredible. Easily Top 5. But my Trails journey is uniquely my own and playing in this order did not lessen my experience.
Oh god, even Weapon is getting into this discourse. I'm not gonna argue on it because my opinion is more or less the same as yours; but I'm also tired of this, it's been two weeks already and it's still going, way more than regular dramas in any case. And yeah, much like kingdom Hearts, this discourse has already happened before and will continue to happen in the future, because the interconnectivity of the series is both its greatest strength and greatest weakness.
I find it very interesting to see your opinion on this matter considering my "weird" playing order. Because I started with Cold Steel 3/4, beat Sky 1, began Sky 2 (found enemies too obnoxious cause I started on Nightmare) and am about to beat Reverie. And I agree that Sky 1 is the best entry point. However, I will say that starting with Cold Steel 3 is "technically" possible. I don't recommend it now (after/while watching your playthrough of CS), but Cold Steel 3 gives enough Info about CS1/2 to not miss "too much". Was I onfused as f**k? Yeah, kind of. But I was more than capable of enjoying it. But I will say: You should DEFINITELY play Sky and Zero before Cold Steel 4 (or at the minimum watch a playthrough) because of some stuff and characters appearing in this game (CS 4 knowledge and it was actually too confusing for me to understand the CS4 plot at the time of my playthrough). And in terms of quality, starting with an early game (Sky 1) is not a problem in the slightest. I actually find Sky 1 to be the 2nd best game in the series (for now) with Reverie being my favorite. (I only dislike Sky 2 for now because I underestimated the difficulty of Nightmare and found it too frustrating, lol. Probably will continue it after Reverie though.)
It's good to know that you could find enjoyment by starting with Cold Steel III. That said, I'm on chapter 2 and I've been playing the games in order starting with Sky and I can confidently say CS III is not a starting point. The game shows you a ton of characters from the start expecting you to know them and I'd just not care the same way if I hadn't played at least CS I and II before. It's the first Trails game where I'm watching the callbacks carry the story this hard.
At the end of the day, the place to start is the place that gets you to actually play the games. If someone, for whatever reason, finds themselves at a point where they would never get around to playing if they had to start with Sky FC, then I would rather have them start the series at whatever point gets them to play, then never pick it up at all.
I wanna play them so bad but i dont wanna start with sky. Im torn between zero cs or db. Zero seems interesting tho but now im scared it will be a bad starting point ;-;. If its like kingdom hearts then jeez yeah no way i can play a later one. I was hoping trails would be more like yakuza. Ive played them all and its all one timeline but i could see myself still understanding those by themselves. But if its like kingdom hearts then its a no go haha
I personally wouldn’t compare Kingdom Hearts, especially 3 to the Trails series. The issue that many people had with KH wasn’t just that they only started with 3 it’s that they only played 1 and 2 and felt that the other titles were spinoffs because they weren’t numbered entries that were spread out across different platforms. Sadly this wasn’t the case a fucking Gameboy game is integral to the plot of Kingdom Hearts, a DS game is integral to the plot of KH and a freaking mobile game was integral to the plot of KH. This is such a bizarre decision that led to KH3 being convoluted and confusing. Sure they did try to remedy this with the remixes but it was too late. Not too mention KH was just made up along the wa. Trails isn’t perfect either since plans change but at least you know what you signed on for compared to KH
Sky FC. It's one of the greatest JRPGs ever made. If they had not gone the harem route, Crossbell would be better than Sky and Erebonia would be almost as good as its prequels. Trails is like Yakuza in that you can understand everything by just playing the mainline games. Kingdom Hearts is a mess lol
In crossbell, i only unlocked 2 characters, Tio and Randy. I never felt the Harem issues others felt. So it was indeed my fav game. After watching LPs i realised how much harem bait I missed and am happy I missed it haha.
I started with CS1 and I went in without knowing there were previous games. I found that out partway through and didn't mind some of the callbacks going over my head. Once I beat CS2 I did some research and watched LadyVirgilia's summaries for Sky and Crossbell before doing CS3. That worked out very well and I felt like I more or less got everything important for the rest of the games. With that being said, I would totally advocate for starting with FC. Summaries help with the big picture but you can easily miss the nuances without playing the actual games.
Not to mention the emotional charge that comes with EXPERIENCING characters and events rather than just knowing what went down from a summary. Zero's finale is one good example of Falcom taking emotional investment players built up over the course of several games and using that in a payoff. Summaries on TH-cam cannot replicate this sense of emotional investment, no matter how detailed they are.
@@Erpy80 100% agree with this. I've played every game in the series in order from Sky FC to Kuro 2, and while I loved Reverie as a grand farewell, and deeply love what Kuro no Kiseki brought to the franchise (Van is so relatable to me and is literally one of my favorite protagonists of all time) - I don't think anything will replace that feeling of Zero's finale. It meant so, so much to me and I *know* it wouldn't have felt the same if Zero was my first game in the series. And equally so, so many moments in Kuro and Kuro 2 hit me deeply because of my experiences with the previous games, that just wouldn't have mattered to me if I hadn't played them all. And just to throw in my two Mira: I think that starting with Kuro would be a mistake, just like starting with Zero would be a mistake, in terms of emotional payoff. It kind of reminds me of what people have said about starting with Cold Steel 3 in a way, where things start out fine, but as you get further and further in, you realize that you don't know these characters or these plot threads and while you can still kind of follow things along, certain moments that are meant to make you emotional instead make you go "huh, that's neat", and you miss out on a huge part of the Trails experience that way. A large part of it, for me, like you said, is the emotional investment that you get by actually playing these games, and I'd go as far as to say that missing out on that does the Trails narrative a huge disservice. And by Kuro 2, you'll want to go back and play the other games anyway, because you'll start to feel *really* lost, for spoiler-related reasons. Certain reveals in Kuro are related to Reverie, which are related to Cold Steel 4, and... well, you get the idea. Idk, I guess my advice to anyone thinking about which game to start with, is to take a breath, and think about what you want out of this series. Do you just want to experience the newest-looking game because it has a character you like the look of, or the art looks neat? Then start with that game. But if you want to experience the Trails series properly, please play them in order. I got a little emotional just seeing Weapons' Sky FC footage, and I will tell anyone who knows about the Trails series that I'm a Crossbell native at heart. I know that city better than my own hometown, and it's like a second home to me. If you're anything like me, you'll think back on your Trails journey and be so glad that you played the games in order. The games aren't going anywhere, so there's no reason to rush and try to 'catch up'. And if you're interested in the series because the idea of the "multi-game, long-running narrative" sounds cool, then definitely trust what a lot of people are saying here, and start with Sky FC. Of course Falcom will market every starting game in a new arc as a good starting point, because they want to make sales, and I don't blame them for that. But I really do feel like the only true starting point is Sky FC.
@@Erpy80 Oh, absolutely. Having played Zero and Azure after the fact, it's not even funny how much more I care about Lloyd and the rest of the SSS compared to having only seen a summary.
Frankly, if someone is seriously interested in starting the Trails series and they look at Daybreak and want to play it for as simple as a reason of "It looks cool" then I say go for it. Maybe it'll be cool enough to them for them to play older games as well, or maybe not. But I know for a fact that if instead I tell that person "No, don't play that new game that does look interesting to you, play this PSP game from 2004 and then 9 other games before it" then they're just not gonna touch the series at all.
Okay, so as someone who doesn't like the purist take on trails (who has also played every trails game... in release order)... I want to offer a kind of opposing view. this is gonna be a long one, but I promise, but given that this perspective was promised, but not... really provided by the video (that's fine, you do you Weapons), I'll do it myself ;). In my opinion, you shouldn't let other people police your fun. You should play the game you want to play. If you want a genuine recommendation, I've provided that below (and it'll be the same as weapons, with more information on Daybreak specifically), BUT, if you're looking for an excuse to start on the newest game. You don't need one, play Daybreak, it's a great game, it's the start of an arc, you can just do it that way and it's fine. I've played it, and while I think it's literally the worst "arc-starter" to start on because of its story, I still think it works just fine without the full context. Also, and this is the one place I really disagree with Weapons in this video, if you don't like the story, and want to trash the game... go ahead, if that makes you happy, do whatever it is you want to do. "Don't let people police your fun" *also* applies to reviews. You should never let a bad review stop you from trying something you want to try... and if you're on the fence, you probably shouldn't trust random bad reviews from twitter people anyways. Okay, onto the topic of the video, recommended playing order. Weapons said it best, if you want the most information, to understand the full context of every game as you play it, there is but one way, Start with FC, and play in release order. That will give you the intended experience and the most context to enjoy that experience. In my opinion, in order, the best starting points after that, if you don't want to play 11 JRPGs before daybreak are, in order, Cold Steel 1, Trails from Zero, and then Trails from Daybreak. You should ideally never start on a sequel, unless you really... really want to for some reason. Again, don't let me police your fun, but yeah, if you genuinely want a recommendation, that's mine as someone who has played all the games available with english translations (fan or otherwise) except Crimson Sin (Daybreak 2). As for reasons: Playing in release order is best for obvious reasons. Cold Steel 1 has a completely new main cast, and while it does have alot of references and returning characters, as every trails game after FC does, the story and most of what happens is pretty easily understood without the additional context. Zero is worse for all the reasons Weapons gives in this video, so you can just reference that if you're wondering. I think it's better than Daybreak because technically, the main plot of the game and the main cast is still new, and doesn't require much past knowledge to appreciate, so you can still at least enjoy the central story, even if some of the significant side characters feel a little underdeveloped. Daybreak... without getting into major spoilers, has a main story issue that makes it hard to recommend starting with. It is an arc starter, the characters are mostly new and you will mostly understand what's going on even without the additional context. HOWEVER, the main story of the game is deeply linked with events of past games in ways none of the other arc starters have, and I don't think the context that defines those events is adequately explored in Daybreak, so I *do* think you lose more than the other games. I genuinely think there is basically no arguing any of these spots on this list. FC is objectively the best place to start, cold steel 1 is next, and zero and daybreak both have significant flaws as starting points but do technically work in a vacuum because of the new casts and stories. Note, I may disagree with Weapons as to how much someone might lose by starting on a later game, but I do *not* disagree that you do lose something. The only way to get it all is to start with FC. I just don't think this is at all similar to Kingdom Hearts, which on top of having a ridiculously complex story, also has one continuous story with the same major characters. To me, the comparison to kingdom hearts is more like "don't start on Cold Steel 4, because it'll be like starting on Kingdom Hearts III". You do lose *something* by starting on anything other than FC, but you won't lose that much if you start at the start of any of the four arcs. TL;DR Don't let people police your fun. Start where you want to start and if you don't like it because you picked a bad spot, that sucks, but if you wanted to start there, that's still fine... lesson learned :). If you want a genuine recommendation: Weapons has it right, you get the MOST by starting with FC.
Counter argument: would you start a book series on the 6th one? Of course you wouldn't. Threat the trails series the same way. If you can't, the series isn't for you, and you shouldn't feel ashamed to skip it entirely.
@@Javifaa Games aren't books. And even in the example of books, people start book series in the middle all the time... Do you think everyone who reads Discworld or the animorphs read all 30+ books in release order, starting from the beginning? I don't...
Wow, someone who's a Kingdom Hearts fan and becoming a Trails fan? Hooray I don't feel alone anymore. And I had flashbacks to this one video I saw a while ago that described the Trails series as, "a bullshit bootleg Kingdom Hearts."
In the case of Metal Gear Solid it’s one of those series where technically there is an order however the games are so self contained that barring MGS4 you can play them in any order. Think about it the first Metal Gear game was on the MSX2 in 1987 it was Japan only same with Metal Gear 2. So when Metal Gear Solid came out in 1997 nobody in the west knew what happened in those games so it was kind of basically background lore. It really wasn’t until after Metal Gear Solid 4 that Kojima started putting all the threads of the game together into one coherent (if nonsensical) plot. It also helps that gameplay is incredibly engaging and has a ton of depth. A good way to summarize this would be like sequels in an action movie series technically there is a plot but if you don’t understand what’s going on you can still enjoy the action on screen. This not surprising as Hideo Kojima is a big movie fan and likes to design his games to capture that feeling.
I started with cold steel 1 because I was searching for games like persona 4. I didn't know trails or it's prequels . This was when cold steel 3 wasn't even localized. Cold Steel was my first game. I do agree that some end scenes of cold steel 2 didn't make sense but that was when I discovered that sky and zero existed. Now caught up to the series, sky fc is definitely the best area to start but I do agree cold steel can also be a starting point, just not the best. Dawnbreak is a no no to start. Your basically spoiling the entire starting arc.
just finished daybreak and i honestly think its better to start with sky sc then daybreak. daybreak very much expects you to know everything about all act 1. i think that the best starting point is sky fc but cs1 one is a good starting point, zero i don't think is a good starting point but its better then daybreak
Another game series like this is Xenoblade... if you skip to 3 you will enjoy it less than if you played 1 and 2 first especially the DLC which will flat out ruin the story of the first 2 for you.
I do think that the absolute best starting point is the first game. But the next best point (which is what I did, because I didn't know about the series as a whole) is cold steel 1. You can play CS 1 & 2 and then go all the way back to the beginning without getting your enjoyment hampered, aside from missing a couple references here and there (though you may be confused by that small bit in CS2). But you absolutely should not move past CS2 without playing the previous titles.
I'm gonna be burned at the stake for saying this. This might be the craziest take in the entire comment section: I personally believe that as long as people understand the fact that there is some information they are going to miss by not playing the previous games, they can reasonably start with EVERY GAME BUT COLD STEEL 4 and REVERIE (Yes I just said that). PD: At least up to Reverie, I haven't played Daybreak but i'm 99% sure it also applies to that game as well. To explain further, I'm not saying they are the IDEAL starting points if you want to UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING. That objectively would be Sky FC... What I'm saying is, they are all great starting points to get a *feel* of the series (gameplay, characters, world, etc.), and from there hopefully they become invested enough to go back and play the other games, or at least read/watch a summary (which is also viable). People seem to forget how much bloated the games actually are. People will be lost for sure on some things. But, the games give enough context and are always paced to start the player from a starting point THEY can understand, and follow up on THAT game's main narrative. The only exception I can think is CS4 because even with all the time that game uses up it's still not enough to fit all the references from previous games, much less explain to new players the terminology, world, why they should care about even a tenth of the cast, etc. And Reverie is built on you already knowing stuff from 2 arcs and caring for those characters. What ultimately matters is that people get started somewhere, and from there they can judge for themselves if they like the games or not. Though definetly start at the begining of an Arc if possible lol
You’ve gained a subscriber once I found out you don’t bite heads off. I respect that, brother. I knew NOTHING about the series and when I saw Cold Steel 1 I liked the case and what I read in the back so I decided to play it and bought Cold Steel 2. When I learned there was more after CS2 I played the Sky games and watched the story of Sky 3, Zero, and Azure while waiting for CS3 to release. I don’t play PC so I couldn’t play Sky 3 and Zero and Azure weren’t out back then. Years later I FINALLY played Zero and Azure when they came out which was after CS 3 and 4. I just finished Reverie and now just waiting for Daybreak. Waiting for CS3 and 4 sucked lol and now we wait for Daybreak and the games after Daybreak
Also I agree with you. People can start where ever they want. However, I do recommend starting with Sky 1 or Cold Steel 1 and if you like it then play the rest. I also agree that Zero is the worst place to start when you compare it to Sky 1 and CS1. Ultimately people can do w/e they want. I just hope they play it and enjoy it
From a outside perceptive playing out of order may not seem like a big deal when you want to start with a game that seems to have new characters than the last. It looks like it could be a fresh start. Unlike Kingdom Hearts which mostly tells the story of Sora and games that don't go back to him.
I started from cold steel 1 and then went to 2. I have all the sky games and plan on playing them next before cold steel 3 and 4. I might play zero/azure but apart from the closing arcs of the characters from sky they are self contained. And while i do agree that starting from sky is probably the best, i liked the mystery of playing cold steel since if you played sky there are some things that are more obvious. Cold steel 1 was a great starting experience and made me want to play the franchise.
I started with the cold steel series (1-4) and then went back and played Sky series through Zero series, and it wasn't that bad. It really made me appreciate the story as a whole better because going back through though because you get that "oh this makes way more sense." I think if you're trying to get into the series and don't want to start with the old games (because of graphics) you should probably start with Cold Steel 1-2 (which is more modern than Sky and Azure) then go back to Sky and Zero. Then play Cold Steel 3 to present. Cold Steel 3, 4, and Reverie are like the start of Avengers Infinite War to Endgame. Whichever entry you start from whether its Sky or Cold Steel the first game is a slow burn. (I wouldn't start with Zero series) If you can get through those 2 games, I think your good. If you're into turn base gameplay I think all of them are pretty good even going back playing the old ones after the newer ones.
I definitely agree with starting with playing Sky first For me personally as i was never even close to JRPG genre before i obly got myself in because of CS series because it felt more "safe" for me to experience. Which made me perceive things in entirly new light tho there were still a lot of things i missed and didnt get playing those games (at least I didint know about Osborne doing 180 after civil war)
My suggestion is to Pirate Sky FC and Cold steel 1. I dont see any reason to start with crossbell. Cant comment about Day break. If Sky turns you down, play Cold steel. If cold steel turns you down, maybe the game isn't for you. You can buy the rest or even FC or Cold Steel 1 if you want to after playing enough of the games
I recommend watching story summary on TH-cam of each series then start at daybreak. When you finish daybreak and you want to go back to play the rest to get a more full experience you can do that. I did that when I stared cold steel 1. Watched a summary just to get me up to speed then after I beat cold steel I went back to previous ones when I had time.
I fully understand why people recommend to start with the Sky games. I personally bought Cold Steel I, just out of curiosity (it was my first Falcom game). II was just a hour or so in when I noticed in the comments on the forum for that game, that it was a part of a whole series, and that there where in fact 5 games before Cold Steel. After some thinking and looking around I finally decided to put Cold Steel I on hold and play the other games first. That was the best decision I ever made, and I am grateful I did that. I have to be honest here - Jumping back from 3D to 2D perspective made me a bit hesitant. But at the end I was "what the hell, let's at least give it a chance". And the rest, so to say, is history. I played all the games in order (thank you guys from Geofront to give me the chance to do that), and I am really glad that I could make that journey. Can you start the series at any other point. Yes of course, but you WILL miss out a lot. I agree that Cold Steel III, Zero and Reverie are about the worst points to start these series. Just like a lot of other people for me it's not about being a purist or a dedicated fan, but after having so much fun with the games and the complete story, I just wish that everyone gets that same great experience as I have gotten. I just feel sad if someone misses out on it, gets confused and is not capable to enjoy the series to the fullest. As a side note: I don't know much about the Kingdom Hearts series, because I am a PC gamer, and those games where never released on the PC. There are a few game series that (although in no way as strong as the Trails series) are a bit more connected. To give a example: The Atelier series from Gust. These games come in several "arcs" that play in the same region/environment, and have re-appearing characters. You have the Arland series (4 games), Dusk series (3 games), Mysterious series (4 games) and the Secret series (4 games). You could add the (non Atelier) Blue Reflection games to it, but so far there are only 2, so it's more a first game and a sequel, so it does not really count. It is recommended to play these games at the start of an arc. Sure - You can start somewhere in the middle, but you will encounter people or/and situations that refer back to the previous games (example: in Atelier Firis you come across some weird Alchemist very early in the game that is directly recognizable for players of the previous game).
I agree that narratively Sky is the ideal place to start but if we keep telling everyone they MUST start there and not with Daybreak then nobody is going to buy it. That’s just bad business. You can easily enjoy the series starting with a new arc and going back to Sky later if you want. It’s not the best choice but if we want new fans to buy the games and for this series or future Legend of Heroes series’ to continue then we have to stop insisting people start with a 20 year old game.
I have enough problems talking anyone into playing this series, that if I can get them to play Cold Steel at least, I will take the win. From the conversations happening in my corner of the fandom who've played Daybreak in Japanese, it seems like that's a place to start as well. Zero would be the only one I don't want to recommend, although when Zero came out I saw several reviewers who successfully used that as their entry point, so *shrug*. I guess my thing is people who are going to dock any game for not explaining all the details are going to be like that irregardless of if the series is long running or not. There's a huge trend of people who don't want to engage their brains at all and read subtext. (PS As a Western fan who had to play Cold Steel I-III before either of the Crossbell games were available in English in any form, I had to play out of order, and it didn't diminish my experience. Even knowing some Crossbell spoilers could not explain the depths of ridiculousness those games got to. It's about the experience, not the twist.)
I hit "go public" and went straight to sleep so I'm only just now seeing everyone's comments. A few things I want to say:
- I have not forgotten about funny moments. Those will be getting released again soon.
- When talking about Kingdom Hearts, this never crossed my mind in the moment, but a variation of the "I don't need to play the older games" type of fan that was probably way more common were the people who only played 1, 2, and then 3 simply because they were the "bigger" numbered games. What I said still applies though.
- Once again, if you did start with a later entry, no ill will. But once again, if you were to ask, I'd always default to release order unless, as I said, you don't have the hardware to play Sky. It helps that it's basically the chronological order too.
At this point, I'm so grateful to my friend who was "forcing" me to play the game in order. Like even it took time more than a year for me to finish 3 games of Sky arc. I could say I had the most burnout of the series from that arc. But I love the way it gets you attached slowly but sure, the curiosity to explore more of the world and the feel of meeting the same character who build you up from the very first, it's exciting. Until I get into Crossbell, and finished 2 games of the arc only in 2 months. I caught up all the games right before Cold Steel 4 released on the west, had to wait until 3 years for Reverie, and now patiently waiting for Daybreak's release in less than a month. Yeay.
Also honestly I really hope the Sky remake rumours for after Daybreak ends up being true both because it gives me an excuse to rerun those games and because it's an easy way to finally just kill this argument while giving people the easy 3D entry point with all the bells and whistles.
I hope so too, but fear that it may get screwed up somehow. I have LOTS of nitpicky problems with the changes made for the Evolution versions, and I fear more would be made in a potential future remake.
@@uchytjes10 on the music side I would just hope they pull a Mario RPG and make the option of Classic and new soundtracks a thing, since the fandom is very particular about music, sometimes a bit exaggerated, sometimes accurate.
@@joaocbcneto Absolutely. I have come around on a lot of the Evo song rearrangements, but some just don't feel 'right', especially in sky 3rd
@@uchytjes10 I will until my dying day question the intelligence (or taste) of people who play the Sky games with the Evolution mod and use the Evo portraits option so they can see Estelle's quadrillion different expressions get downsized to about 12 or so. Or people who play with the Evo openings that essentially were a giant wink towards people who played the original games and giant FU to people who came in new.
@@Erpy80 only Evo mod I used was the voices one well besides Geofront having the option to swap soundtracks more easily.
Hope you do more vids just talking to us! I’ll happily take more of these, feels like a chill convo about Trails.
I'll see what I can do. I kinda have to feel passionate about something to do that but we'll see
Everyone should start with gagharv's prophecy of the moonlight witch since it ties directly to the origins of fc
Start from the beginning always I did it and have no regrets.
"I'm gonna roast purists too"
>immediately goes back to roasting game skippers and defending purists
This is why you're the GOAT Weapons
I didn't even do that on purpose lol. I was kinda like "what are the purists doing wrong here? Oh, just that? Ok, moving on."
There’s a comment I saw a while ago saying that they played the prologue chapters for Sky FC, Zero, and Cold Steel I to get an idea what the countries are, then went back to Sky.
I kinda like that idea.
I played in release order, because during my time, only Sky SC was available on Steam. And for that same reason, I was forced to skip Zero and Azure till CS4 got announced in English.
This is where I had a friend that strongly recommended me to play Zero and Azure before going in CS4 and I am truly happy to have followed that advice because it gave me more hype and enjoyment about the game.
Personally, I think that Sky FC is the best starting point, so that all the story threads make sense and you get all the emotional beats, with CS1 being the second best. Totally agree with you about Zero.
I loved Trails in the Sky so I would recommend anyone to start there simply because they are great games all on their own. People usually don't like to 'downgrade', so it's fitting with the narrative to start at the very beginning as the world itself grows and evolves alongside the technology used in the series. In some cases I prefer the 'simpler' Sky/Crossbell presentation over the more modern 3D, though there are moments in Hajimari where I think Falcom finally managed to achieve a quality in the cutscenes and animations where it is superior in presentation.
Also, for the true completionists among us, I would recommend playing the entire Falcom lineup of games starting from Trails in the Sky to really get a full appreciation of what Falcom has been trying to gradually achieve with every project as a milestone.
In all honesty, in some ways the combat scenes in Sky FC and SC still haven't been surpassed. Even though a lot of the time it seemed like it was just two sprites hopping about, there were lots of cool little touches. Loewe jumping on top of Agate's sword Dark Link-style and using it as leverage to jump over him. Estelle doing a wall jump to jump over Kloe during the school play's finale. Cassius catching the tip of Julia's rapier with the tip of his bo staff during their practice session. Cassius planting his staff into the ground and doing a fulcrum kick to ward her off. Cassius meeting Julia in mid-air and drop-kicking her to the floor. Cassius brutally, brutally schooling Reverie if your BP was too low.
Nothing in Cold Steel, not even in Reverie, could match that. During a large part of Cold Steel, we'd be lucky if the game just played those characters' standard combat craft animations. If not, the screen would fade to black and some battle sounds were played.
Likewise, none of the talking animations in the 3D games can match the sheer expressiveness of many of Sky's dialogue portraits, Estelle's merely being the most prominent, but not the only example.
@@Erpy80 Well said, thank you for the addition - you've expressed my point in much greater detail than I did. I suppose I am charitable to Hajimari/Reverie since I am encouraged by the improved animations, but it goes to show just how much there is to like about Sky and older Falcom games in general.
It's funny that some people that complain about the "downgrade" often admit they also play pixelated games like Octopath Traveler, Stardew Valley, Star Ocean - The Second Story and so on. When confronted with that they often go suspiciously quiet.
Personally I don't care about it. I played all games from Sky FC to Reverie, and had a great time with all of them. I agree that if you really want the full story and "get" all nuances, characters and relationships, there is no other way. That said - It does not really hurt that much if you start with Cold Steel I, but you miss out a lot of context. Starting with every other game is really not recommended.
If you can start with Kuro is something I cannot say anything about, because I have not played that game yet. We are a few weeks away from that now, so it won't take that long (well - I have to finish that game first of course) before I can say anything about that...
I tend to look at it where as long as you go in knowing you’re not at the beginning and you’re okay with that (as sometimes people get it as a gift, or they’re getting what’s available to them due to restrictions on console or money or whatever), then if you play it and like it, then it’s ultimately that the series has found itself a new fan and there’s nothing wrong with that 😅
I don’t understand why people get really worked up about it. Is there an “optimal” way to play them? Ig, yeah, but ultimately it’s more important that people enjoy playing them imo
I'm in the camp of people who played the entirety of Cold Steel, and from there started from the very beginning. I then replayed it through reverie and I'm now on Daybreak. I love picking up on concepts and ideas retroactively.
I saw your Let's Plays, so I'm not spoiling anything. I liked playing SC and understanding why Laura in the first Cold Steel has a gripe against jeagers. I loved seeing Prince Olivert put together class 7 based off his past adventures, and then seeing trials he's gone through in the first two arcs. I thought it was so cool how Kurt exerted himself to master the Vander dual style and then retroactively seeing why it's so highly regarded and how that rivals Laura's practice. The graveyard scene in CS3 with the flowers felt so satisfying when I saw Joshua's arc afterwards, and learning why Ash's arc was so significant by learning about Hamel made me appreciate his character more.
In Daybreak there's a land the party visits that lines up with Scherazard's back story, and despite it not being confirmed I love that I could theorize about a character who hasn't been playable in years. I will say that as soon as you start playing Daybreak you will see how much love they give to characters we haven't seen in years, and this is by far the most rewarding game as far as callbacks go. There's one scene with sky characters and the main protagonist and you can see how much they respect their legacy, but you don't necessarily need to have played Sky to respect it.
But you have no idea how just how hard Loewe's graveyard scene in CS3 hit after playing every previous game, especially when that Sky music was going on in the background. Playing the games out of order just dampens the experience. Before I started playing Cold Steel 3 and 4 I had waa determined to figure out how to play Zero and Azure with a fan translation because I realized characters from that arc were going to be making more appearances and the Crossbell games weren't localized yet. It bothers me Falcom didn't give players in the west the opportunity to play the series in order. Fans jumping in now should be grateful they get to play them from the beginning but no they still insist on starting with Reverie or Daybreak because :shiny new game is better than ugly old game".
I started with Cold Steel 1, and loved it!
Instead of going right into 2 (people probably know why I would have wanted to) I decided, "Im in this for the long haul, so I'm gonna play Sky now!"
Glad I did! I'm about half-way through SC, and it's been a JOURNEY!!!!
Starting at FC: Ideal
Starting at Zero: Weird but it could work
Starting at Cold Steel 1: You'll miss some context and some reveals won't hit as hard but the story will still make sense
Starting at Reverie/Kuro 1: You'll be spoiling the whole first saga for yourself effectively
Kuro 1 spoils relatively little all things considered. Kuro 2 and probably Kai are different stories. It’s probably a better start point than zero not considering the rest of their arcs
Starting at Cold Steel 4: Oh yeah, it's big brain time
@@Aaronrules380 Yeah, I agree. Some "general world state" stuff will inevitably be spoiled of course, but Kuro generally avoids spoiling you outright about specific plot points or character stories and opts to just allude to stuff you're meant to know. It's a trade off between being spoiled and feeling a bit lost on the finer details of what the characters are talking about. I think the weirdest thing about playing Kuro first would be the disconnect of how much more the protagonist, Van, knows about world events than you do.
@@esuelle I feel that disconnect, and I played all the others! It's mostly when characters allude to other people, but the points stands.
I can't imagine how confusing it must be for a newcomer. I blame the fan-translation, but deep down I know I'm just dumb.
@@Velerium I feel you, and you're probably not dumb :) ! I played all the other games twice and consider myself to know all the lore and events pretty well, but many times playing Kuro I had to stop and think for some time, "wait, who/what are they talking about here?". Since I have all the information I find that process pretty fun and satisfying, but a newcomer would have no chance. The roughness of the fan translation didn't help either. Japanese can be especially ambiguous when it comes down to the subject of a sentence, which gets amplified by rough and literal fan translations. I find that the official localizations put a lot more effort in removing excessive ambiguity. But just for the record, I'm super thankful for the fan translation, it was more than adequate for my first playthrough.
FC for the optimal experience. For as much as critics love to call it slow, it's also among the shortest in the series at about 50 or so hours, so it's not a terrible time investment if you find that it simply isn't for you. If anything, it's actually quite respectful with your time and doesn't need the kind of grinding later titles do with more inventories to manage or more knick knacks to collect.
I love that I started with Sky. And the more entries come out, the more apparent it becomes that it's just the right way to go about it. They mention stuff from all over constantly, and to fully understand it beyond just "Oh, that's a thing, and that's a place, and that's a person, and that sure is a word" you kinda need the prior knowledge. People can start where they want, but they need to be aware that the series spans over 10 games with a continuous plot, characters, all that. If they get confused, that's on them.
Seeing this, yeah you better see that NG+ exclusive event on CS II after you've beaten it before jumping to CS III.
Definitely this. I started CS3 shortly after CS2 and when i met the certain characters you're referring to in that game I was a bit lost, had to google what was going on only to be told that revelation was exclusive to NG+ on CS2. It didn't really affect anything for me but it would have been nice to know beforehand lol.
Is it just one scene they show after beating the game, or is it gradually shown in bits and pieces throughout the second playthrough?
IIRC it's a scene you get from collecting certain items in the game, and once you have them all you get a special scene from said characters which reveals more information about them, I just watched it on TH-cam. It's not worth playing the whole game again for what is a 5 minute scene. Once you've beat CS2 you might want to Google what the scene is, or just play the first few hours of CS3 and get the revelation there. It feels played down that way though.
@@weaponsci It's a series of notes (like 2 pages each) exclusive to NG+ that give you a special cut-scene if you gather them all. I recommend reading them all and then watching the cut-scene on youtube once you're done with CS2.
@@Chumbv There's probably videos showing the whole thing, from gathering the notes, turning them in with a certain character, getting decryptions of the notes to read and finally the scene that people refer to. I'd argue the contents of the notes are just as important as the final scene.
Without spoiling anything, Daybreak has A LOT of returning characters from all previous games (like more than 20). As well as connecting plot points that go way back, I would never in good faith recommend someone to start the series with it.
Oof. So it's more akin to Zero than CS1 then?
@@weaponsci More or less. Although if you don't know who they are, you are not really get screwed. Renne in Zero is gonna confuse you for example. Renne in Daybreak is simply meeting old friend.
I'd agree with this, however, some of the returning characters are definitely context spoilers for IF a player did start at Kuro and work backwards. Simply knowing their profession or that they end up in Calvard eventually may take a lot away from their story and emotional impact. Even Renne, knowing she's the really takes out any guess work about her arc in Sky/Crossbell.
Not exactly theirs pretty much only like 4 to 5 playable party members in BOTH current daybreak games in Japanese that aren't the CS 1 to 4 party members Kuro 2 only has like 17 total party members with 2 of them being limited to its version of the TRC dungeons and only AFTER you beat Daybreak 2.
I started with Cold Steel. Played all the way through 4. THEN went back to Sky and played the remaining in order. And my experience was AMAZING. I loved Sky even more knowing having played through the Cold Steel Arc. Already knowing the Sky FC twist made so many interactions in that game crazy interesting. Knowing how certain characters got their beginnings was so great to see how far she had come. It did not lessen the experience in any way at all, and in fact, I think only helped my personal playthrough.
And that is partly because of how I view spoilers. Generally speaking of course, because as with everything, there is no such thing as a “one size fits all” view. For me, spoilers are meaningless. There is no such thing as a spoiler without context. And to be clear, despite my personal opinion on the topic, I still try not to spoil others being aware of the general opinion on the subject. So knowing what would happen and hearing all about the events from Sky SC only made me excited to experience them with a different context. Without context, a spoiler is meaningless. So knowing a thing happens is VASTLY different from seeing the build-up and watching the story build to the thing.
I maintain, a good story cannot be ruined by a spoiler, it only changes the context. Whereas if you think the spoiler ruined the story, then you don’t think the story was very good. It was just a shocking twist for you to talk about.
Now, with all that being said. Of course the ideal spot to start the series is Sky FC. It’s the intended beginning of the story. But I would never call people who started the story differently wrong, or say their experience was inferior. It’s just a different experience.
Totally agree. We need to stop this there is only one way to play BS. We should be asking the person questions about them to personalize the answer and give them options. Gameplay is almost never talked about in these type of videos and for large number of people it can be very important. For people like that starting with CS would be a good place to enter the world of Trails.
No offense but "starting with the new shiny games" is basically what most of the current Western Trails fanbase did when they started with CS1 (the 6th entry) not sure why it would be a problem only now, and i honestly feels there's some selfish motivations behind the gatekeeping than any real good intentions actually (there is for sure, but some people are trying to hide behind those while being intentionally deceptive), the fact that a lot of current "fans" were celebrating for the loss of profit once Daybreak/Kuro didn't sell well in Japan was already self explanatory to me, some people obviously just wants the Calvard arc to bomb in the west too so they decided to hop on that little crusade more than ever since the time Falcom started to move on to something else than Rean/Cold Steel, i do have some theories about it (including those "anti-woke/anti-localisation, anti-NISA"), and it mostly regard all the "new changes" the arc in question has made to the serie, and to be honest, it has just gone back to it's roots overall (the bigger change would be the action gameplay and the possibility to move freely in turn based mode) for me it just looks like the whole Gundam SEED Destiny debacle where a lot of "fans" made noises just because it wasn't about Kira Yamato anymore, i'm pretty sure you won't hear much noises if Rean become a lot more relevant again in Kai no Kiseki, Kiseki/Trails are about Zemuria first but seems some people got "too attached" to some protagonists.
I personally started Sky FC with the japanese version on the PSP (and it's been that way for a while now, i do purchase the western products as supportive gesture though) and that's where my Trails/Kiseki journey started, but if people wants to start with an arc starter i'll always say, "yeah sure, have fun, welcome to the Kiseki/Trails series by the way" while warning them that the series has a lot of dialogues and that they needs to be invested enough to enjoy it, it will be a bit different if they wants to start in the middle of an arc though, where i'll just try to politely convince them to at least play the start of the arc they wants to play, for example if someone want to go for Crossbell my answer will be "Zero", same if people want to start with Erebonia my answer will be "CS1" (which also can spoil a bit of stuff concerning Sky and Zero/Azure but again "strangely" no one dare to mention this), obviously the "ideal" way to start is Sky FC and the worst place to start is Reverie for anyone as long as they haven't got into the Liberl, Crossbell and Erebonia arc, after all it's an epilogue title for the 3 arcs we got while being a subtle introduction to the new one, the reason it was called "Hajimari" in Japan in the first place.
Also Loewe is the MVP and no one will ever come close, (except Arianrhod and Mcburn, i'm more of an Uroboros enjoyer personally) well, Crow's got the look at least.
While I do indeed have some criticisms toward NISA, it has never gotten to the point where I have intentionally wanted a certain game to bomb (provided it was good, and I've yet to be disappointed by a Trails game).
As I said in the video, I try not to be too dickish about it, and I understand that there are many who do take things too far.
I started on cold steel 3 on switch. I spent about 30-45 minutes reading the in game synopsis of the first 2 games in that series and it still pulled me in. I am sure I would have enjoyed the others as well
Great video Weapons. I'm on the same page as you. Keeping it very vague because I don't want to speak too much of Daybreak but just to offer my 2 cents as someone that has played it already, you *can* start with it (or any other start point) and have a lot of fun and even fall in love with the franchise. BUT you absolutely need to be ready to have things fly over your head or confuse you every other dialogue box, and not understanding what the characters are alluding to half the time will for sure make the story less enjoyable as a whole, although if you go in with the right mindset that could work as a nice motivator to go back to the older games and fill in the missing puzzle pieces of your understanding.
Anyway. For anyone that isn't allergic to older games, just start at Sky. They're great and I wish I could play them again for the first time. I could say more but I'd just be recapping the video 😅
Since Zero and Azure became readily available in the west last year, you can finally play the series in order. So I'd always tell people to start with Sky.
First off, the the potential stranger who is not already familiar with the series who actually is confused about where to start: The people who tell you to start with sky FC are not gatekeeping. They are simply eager for MORE fans to enjoy the series they love as much as possible just like they love the series. That's the opposite of gatekeeping. That's... tour-guiding, or something.
The people who accuse us of gatekeeping are in fact the toxic people. They hurl irrelevant insults and are going out of their way to damage other people's enjoyment of the series. Playing the games out of order isn't only about understanding or not understanding everything. It's also about getting the proper emotional payoff. I'm honestly the least sensitive person I know when it comes to disliking spoilers. You can tell me some major character dies in a story and it wont bother or ruin the experience for me because my brain is completely wired to enjoy the journey, not the destination. Despite this, I still think some of the most powerful, emotional moments in the series will fall flat if you play out of order. Zero is quite possibly the most significant example of this. For the love of god please don't play zero before sky, not because I want to gatekeep you out of the series, but because I want you to love the games as much as possible.
I can understand wanting to start from Cold steel because new folks might have a hard time enjoying an old 2d game, I can accept this, and just ask they keep their minds open to sky as they play cold steel. Just don't play zero before sky, and yeah, don't criticize t he story to newcomers of the series if you decided to chop your experience in half and start mid-way thru.
I have more to say about those people who toss the label 'gatekeeper' around, but youtube will autodelete my message I'm sure.
See, personally I started with Reverie. At the time I only had a switch and none of the sky trilogy or cs1-2 were on switch(still aren't) and I decided to say fuck it. I regret absolutely nothing. Since then I've gotten a ps5 so I can atleast play cs1 and 2.
@deathking9278 you might "regret nothing" now, but the reality is, you don't know what you're missing or robbing yourself of until it's too late. Simply knowing that certain characters aren't dead, or ended up in certain countries or jobs by Reverie, will absolutely undermine the emotional journey of their arcs when you do eventually go back.
I think that's what the original commenter meant. It's not that you won't have fun playing. And even if things don't make sense, they will eventually. It's the fact that the narrative was written with the emotional impact in mind, and playing the games any way other than release order inherently diminishes that.
The Legend of Nayuta: Boundless Trails is the only one you need :)
Great video. You're doing Adios' work! Also, I'm a firm believer that the only acceptable answer to the question of "where should I start playing Trails"? Is Trails in the Sky FC. The entire thing that separates Trails from other RPGS is the world building and overarching story. If you skip all of that so that you can play the "newest game with the shiniest graphics" you're missing the entire point of the series. Just go play FF7 remakes. Trails is not about shiny graphics. It's about the biggest and best overarching narrative in gaming, and starting anywhere but the beginning robs you of that experience. It's not toxic gatekeeping to advocate that position.
I 100% agree with you, I think the best way for people to understand the situation is to change the form of media, you wouldn't start the 3rd book in a series, you wouldn't start the 5th season of a TV show, you wouldn't watch the direct sequel to a movie, so why skip multiple games? Though I do recognise that as amazing trails is, it's not for everyone. If you can't convince someone that skipping multiple games worth of world building, character development, political intrigue, and so forth is bad, I don't think trails is for them.
The one opposition I have is I think you were too critical of NISA towards CS III, yes they did market CS III as an entry point, but that was because Falcom said it themselves so I don't think NISA can be completely at fault. As to why Falcom said it was an entry point, I think they realised CS had major success because of the soft reset to the series so they advertised CS III as an entry point to boost sales, even though it's possibly the second to worst entry point in the whole series.
I just realised I unconsciously referenced that infamous piracy ad from the 2000s XD
Because games aren't movies and gameplay matters most
@@Walamonga1313 Ever heard of visual novels? Games that have barely any gameplay but incredible stories
I just tell people to start with FC but if they can't handle the older graphics try cold steal because it's easier entry point then circle back around if the games are for you and the newest game isn't the best place to start because you will be lost and confused for awhile and not get much build up for some of the characters stories
Funny thing is I started by picking up cold steel 1 on steam and only played about 10 minutes. Stopped and went to the Internet to see why I haven't heard about this interesting game and found out I should start with fc since personally that's the way I would prefer playing it as I love a good long story. So I got lucky I didn't keep going but while playing fc I just couldn't wait to get to the graphical level of the cold steel series. And what ended up happening was that I got to the crossbell games and found out I had to wait for them 😂 but I got lucky I only had to wait about a month or two.
I feel bad for whoever accidentally started in games like Sky the 3rd, Reverie or one of the sequel games.
Cause you know it's gotta have happened to someone at some point.
It's almost impossible considering the game shows the story for the prequel and reading them is so much text.
@@pianissimo7121 no I mean someone buying it by mistake thinking it's like final fantasy for example and just going "wtf is going on?"
We should make someone who hasn't played trails experience this so we can all see what it would be like 😂
@@anime-girlfriend we need 2 sacrificial lambs. One for sky 3rd and 1 for Reverie.
I always say start at the beginning of it all, start with Sky arc and then work ur way up to Daybreak.
For me it doesn't matter where you start. But importantly the timing where you have been hooked by the game.
Like for me I started playing the Trails when I buy PSVita way back 2016 and my first was Trails Of Cold Steel 1.
Once I finished the game since it was a cliff hanger, I wanted more to know about, that's why I search the previous games and so on but Zero/Azure were not available in the West yet.
In the next year and so on I finished them all up until Trails Into Reverie and I am collecting all of the Collector's Edition from Xseed/NISA :)
Long story short, luckily the new comers now is welcome to start either from Liberl, Crossbell, Erebonia or Calvard.
Falcom fans here!
As long as you don't start in the middle of an arc, you'll be fine.
I _did_ start with Sky FC, and I _did_ play all (western available) games in chronological order. With the huge amount of story, world-building and background information that are presented throughout the games, I would say you will inevitable missing a lot of references if you don't play it in order... and you will be missing out on some great games if you skip previous titles completely.
But I would also say that this isn't a real problem with all the resources that we have at hand today.
If you want to understand some specific thing that came up in a game... you can look it up on the fansites. If you want to get a general overview of the previous stories... there are summaries available. If you want to experience the games without having to play them yourself... there are a lot of good Let's Play series out there.
I wouldn't recommend starting with an explicit sequel title - like Sky 3rd, CS IV or even Reverie (which basically is Cold Steel 5+Crossbell 3)... but you can start with every single arc, and work backward from there as desired, or not.
The only real reason I would still advise to start with Sky FC is mechanical. Inevitably, the games have improved and been enhanced in terms of pure playability as well as the introduction of new mechanics. Getting back from something like Reverie to Sky, or even CS1 can feel clunky and a bit lacking.
This "problem" would not occur if you played in order... building upwards instead of down, and enjoy the new features, the changed or improved graphics.
Though I know and understand that there are a lot of people out there, especially in the RPG and JPRG fandoms, who love to play the classics, and I have to say for myself that I still prefer the graphics style of Sky and Crossbell over the later entries.
But all in all... I think the question of "where should I start Trails?" is a lot less important than "should I start Trails?"
There can only be one answer to that: yes, you should. Whereever you want. It's an amazing journey.
you wouldnt look up tita or agate just because you see them in cold steel 3 or who is estelle when they dont know they are important if you start there.
One thing you didn't really bring up is that while most "first games" are decent entry points to some degree, follow-up games often start dropping references much more liberally, often under the assumption that people who played an entry point game got hooked and decided to start from the beginning of the franchise before jumping into the follow-up game. Azure's trade conference chapter was an excellent example. Cold Steel II has a section where it walks up to players who haven't played the Crossbell games, delivers a little cut, takes several Weissmanns worth of salt and then starts rubbing and rubbing and rubbing and rubbing. You'll know it when you see it. And you'll feel for us poor souls who had to play through that part with no external context.
Many long-time players don't really MEAN to "gatekeep" (I think the word is used a bit too liberally in this debate), but they want people to understand that this franchise is NOT like Tales or Final Fantasy and rather than just wanting people to experience the games they way they did, they want people to experience the games the way they wish they did. (many really long-time fans never played Crossbell before the first two Cold Steel games because Zero and Azure weren't playable in English at all, not through official means and not through unofficial means either at that point, but they wish they did)
I occasionally wonder if some "anti-gatekeeper" venom is simply rooted in good ol' console warring. Like, the three Sky games are only available on PC, people like their Sony console, so they're not gonna recommend people picking up games on another platform. (and then probably sticking to that platform for the rest of the franchise)
Regarding the last paragraph, it is absolutely what you speculate. Some people just refuse to play on pc, and take as many excuses as they can to not do that. Some admit it's the reason, some don't.
If you ask me, they should just make an exception, dust off an old pc, and give the GOG version of the sky trilogy a go.
I played the Sky trilogy, then Zero (with the Geofront patch), and by the time I was done with Zero, the Geofront patch for Azure had been taken down and the agreement with NIS America had been announced. So, I played Cold Steel 1 and 2, then Zero again (official NIS localization), and then Azure (finally), then Cold Steel 3 and 4, and then Reverie. So I played it pretty close to release order, with only Azure not being in the right spot. Playing in release order is preferred, I do agree that Sky FC and Cold Steel 1 are the two best entry points (haven't played Daybreak yet, so no comment).
Sky fc is the starting point. Remakes are coming soon anyway so this should make it easier for more people.
Remakes in the same way Zero and Azure Kai (or the western PC/Switch versions) are remakes. I seriously doubt they will redo the visuals, revise the story, or touch the gameplay in any significant way.
I started with Zero and had no problem playing the game or understanding anything. And it's become my fav game. Then I went from Azure to CS3 and loved that game too. Anything I was curious about was explained in the story summary the game itself provides. And when I wanted to know more I looked it up with a quick Google search. Eventually went back to play CS1 and had fun seeing the details. Personally I just have never had an issue with story order.
Generally, yeah. Sky is the obvious best place to start with. But something I've noticed while browsing the internet is there are a lot of people that are leery to commit to a 20 year old game. Cold Steel 1 and 2 are definitely a viable alternative to them with the hopes that after falling in love with the setting and characters they'll be more receptive to going back and trying the older games. Plus you have all those who don't want to game on a PC. Daybreak will be the same way, although that game is massively shaped by the events of CS4 and Reverie, so imo it's a little less viable compared to CS1. Plus there are people who bounce hard off the gameplay of FC, which is understandable considering how slow that game is.
Really appreciate the video. Trails is such a great series and I would love to see more people get into it. You’re absolutely right about starting at an arc other than Sky. You’re gonna have to accept some stuff is going to fly over your head. That was my experience starting the series with Cold Steel.
I don’t regret starting where I did though. This series has my favorite turn based combat and character build mechanics of all time. I don’t think I would have stuck around if I started with the Sky arc, because the mechanics were much more simple. I’m a gameplay over story kind of person though.
Hi I watched nicoB’s playthrough of sky fc, got invested in it and impatient enough for videos to come out that I binge watched someone else’s playthrough of the sky trilogy, is it fine if I start with trails from zero?
i mean yeah? if you watched the lets play then you should be fine lol. you know everything that you need to know.
Honestly, the way I see it, is that this whole beef seems to come from the fact that people want to be part of the "conversation" so badly, that they want to play the Shiny New Thing despite knowing the series is chronological.
To be real, it's not worth it. The only experience that matters is your own. So from that vein, if you can at all, my recommendation is still playing chronologically from Sky FC. Don't treat it like a race to get to the newest game, it's more like a marathon. Take your time and enjoy the ride. Once you do get to the newer games it'll be much more worth it, trust me.
It reminds me of people who refuse to read One Piece because it's 'too long'. But like....so what? Why does that deter you? Because you want to be caught up as fast as possible so you can be a part of the 'conversation' right? Just read it, man.
Oh yeah 100%. I started sky FC like four years ago and as I said in the video, I'm still not caught up yet because I've taken my time lol.
I agree that sky will always be the best starting point, but I also think people overestimate how much not understanding everything will always effect an experience. Like Dragonball Z literally starts on a team up of former enemies and dramatic shift of understanding of the lead’s origins that won’t really come through if you started with it, but DBZ also caught on in the west despite being released before Dragonball. And back when I was a kid watching anime through reruns was super common, which meant you were often missing episodes and going out of order just due to tv schedules
I do recall that. Yeah you're right. That was actually my exact experience with Dragon Ball, even.
It also reminds me of my experience with Digimon back in the day. Whenever it came on TV, they'd rerun seasons 1-4 every night. Once they aired the last episode of season 4, they'd circle back to season 1, and this was done until season 5 came out and they were ready to air that.
Because of this, season 4 was the first season I saw, and because of this, I thought the cast turning into the Digimon power rangers/sentai style was normal, and was a bit weirded out when I tuned in for season 1 and that group of characters had partner Digimon. It wasn't until I got to season 3 that I realized having the Digimon digivolve and the kids stand around was the norm, and season 4 was the exception, not the rule.
@@weaponsci The thing is, the best stories understand that what they show you is just one particular period in the characters' lives. There were and always will be stories before and afterwards. I'm pretty sure Trails is one of those stories; Estelle was a pretty blank slate, but Joshua had a whole life before we met him. As did Schera, and Zin, and Olivier, and Cassius, etc.
In fact, I'm coming round to the idea that Zero isn't a bad starting point after all. You get this side story about 2 good-hearted people pursuing a deeply traumatized child in order to show her love and acceptance, and I think that could be a complete and satisfying story on its own. And you could then play Sky and see how they met, or what happened to the child to traumatize her.
I think another reason is that DBZ was designed as a weekly manga first before an anime. If you are reading the weekly Shonen Jump it has to capture the readers attention even in the middle of a series. Akira Toriyama was an expert in immediately grabbing your attention with the structure of his pages and art. So a good majority of manga have to be self contained to be enjoyed as a solo experience while having an overarching goal (this of course subjective and varies). There are probably many people who started in the middle of a manga or anime and went back and watched/read it from the beginning I know I did.
west? You mean america. I personally wouldnt want to start with z having experienced dragonball normally
@@obba40 yeah that what I meant my earliest exposure to Dragonball was DBZ on toonami there was no easily available manga or anime websites (I didn’t even know what the internet was). The first time I saw it was near the end of the Frieza saga (Goku had turned Super Saiyan and five minute countdown had begun). Ideally yes engaging with the narrative from the beginning is the best but back then in the late 90s early 2000s we really did not have that luxury. Yeah I’m very grateful people can enjoy Dragonball from the beginning cause the fight with Jackie Chun is one of my favorites.
I love the thumbnail
Yes Sky is painfully slow but no one has ever regretted pushing through it because everything in trails pays off in the end and honestly forty hours isn’t a very long time anymore when it comes to games. I finished all Sky FC to 3rd and Cold Steel 1-4 in two years (including a very long pause when my laptop went kaput) My husband just replayed Sky FC and finished in 25 hours with a guide, not to mention how helpful (however broken) turbo mode is and you don’t need a top of the line pc to play it runs on a potato. That’s all why I’m a Sky purist because you end up playing trails for the story so FC should always be the start
I get starting with games out of order, especially when so many series these days aren’t so tightly connected. (Theres no real reason to play an elder scrolls or fallout game in order for example, since they’re only loosely connected)
I had friends back in the day that started mass effect with 3 because it was new and that bought into the hype. But i feel like I enjoyed it way more because i played them in order at each game’s release. Especially because I had imported saves.
Sky being only available on PC does also change some things.
I’m only just now starting trails, and I decided to start with Sky FC and to go in release order. I just hit chapter 3 of FC last night before i went to bed. I’m having an absolute blast. I do find it *slightly* odd that people are unwilling to start the trails series with older titles because of graphics though. I totally get wanting more modern systems, especially in a action battle system game…but for turn based I don’t really get it. Older action games often have much clunkier combat systems and controls that don’t feel great. But turn based doesn’t really change much. I know daybreak has the new hybrid system, and I totally get its appeal, but you’re still going to be doing a lot of fights with the turn based option, so it hard to picture that being the deal breaker.
I can admit, I’m very used to older games and graphics and that graphics are typically the last thing i take into consideration when buying a game. Don’t get me wrong, it’s definitely nice to have, but i don’t think I’ve bought a game just for the graphics, or not bought one because of the graphics, since i was maybe an early teenager but that was probably only a few rare occasions. I feel like it needs to be about the FUN FACTOR first and foremost. Sometimes that can mean the gameplay, sometimes it can mean the story. Both influence if you’re having a good/fun time. Its hard to think of visuals being the reason you aren’t having fun.
I know people say that they don’t want to start with sky fc because its “slow” but i really don’t agree at all. It definitely takes its time, but absolutely nothing so far has been done without reason. Every slow moment where Estelle and Joshua take time to just live in the world and the moment feels so incredibly purposeful and it’s honestly my favorite part of this series so far. The combat also feels incredibly modern for a psp game from 2004. The turn based is semi fast paced, has plenty of modern convinces, and has enough depth to keep you engaged but isn’t overly complicated. I’m by no means a JRPG fan, and have only played a handful of them, and finished even less, but this game series is already something incredibly special and unique and implore people (even people who have never played a jrpg) to give this series a chance. It’s legitimately a beautiful piece of art.
I played all of Sky, then CS1 and CS2, "found" a way to play all of Crossbell, then CS3, 4, then Reverie. The ONLY reason I didn't play in order is because Crossbell wasn't out in English when I played. After very spoilery events that simultaneously occur in Azure and CS2 and when I saw the beginning of the Epilogue for CS2, I knew I had to play Crossbell. So far, I've invested nearly a 1000 hours into this series, and despite my issues with Cold Steel 4's ending, Reverie was enough to reignite my passion. Start in the beginning is my advice.
In short, Sky FC
NOW
Profile Pic checks out
It's funny how the answer can simply be "if you care about knowing the whole story from start to finish, start with Sky. If you don't, it's not a big deal where you start" and yet people still feel the need to argue.
I say this having started with CS I/II, not knowing anything about Trails, and my enjoyment of those games wasn't bothered one bit. Actually those games motivated me to go back and play the older ones, which wouldn't have happened if I wasn't introduced to the series first through Cold Steel.
I do agree tho out of all the arcs, Crossbell is prolly the last one you'd want to start with. Not only do those do games run concurrent with the first two Cold Steel games, so you're missing just as much on that end as if you started with Cold Steel, but like you said, you get spoiled on the ending to three of the most important character arcs from Sky.
But yeah we as Trails fans are pretty spoiled cause in the end, Falcom does such a good job in handling each arc so that any one of them would make a good entry point to the series.
In my opinion starting from the newest shiniest arc is fine. This was my case, i went in completely blind into cold steel 1, which was the newest arc at that point. And enjoyed it so much i decided to play the whole series after, because i actually wanted to know more. You should be reasonable to the people who aproach this franchise. It has 10+ games, more than 500+ hours of gameplay. If you point a new player to go and play old games he might not enjoy the mechanics of it and drop the whole series right there. But that desire to know more after playing new games will make them stick around and actually sit down and play those games.
I think the concern people have is that CS1 (and even CS1+2), are by far the least problematic new arc starts that aren't FC, given that CS3 was pitched as a soft arc reset and Zero has Sky characters all over it.
I haven't played Daybreak and so I don't know, but given past experience it could range from "eh, it's a decent place to start" to "holy shit, it spoils everything before it and is very confusing for new players". On top of that, it has been increasingly common in Trails for the latter half of arcs to focus much more on the overarching series story, which means you often reach a breaking point in the new arc (CS3+, for example) where it is highly suggested for you to go back and play the previous arc, which can be annoying.
I honestly don't know how to resolve this issue, as it is already *a lot* to ask players to play Sky and Crossbell for CS3+, and I understood that people don't want to go through all that trouble. But, unfortunately, many of the Trails games just expect you to have played everything and there's no getting around it.
@@Dahras1 When I started Cold Steel I went completely blind, knowing absolutely nothing about trails as a whole. I just picked the first game in the trilogy (4's wasn't out in the west at that point). When I got to CS2 and its end (which I agree would be confusing for someone who never played or at least heard about Zero/Ao) I did my research caught up a little, read some stuff, learned that there are two arcs before cold steel. I knew who Lloyd and Rixia were when I got to that part. I would advise new players to do some research and then deciding either they want to see it themselves or not.
Every entry to each arc did a good job of worldbuilding up to this point. I would assume daybreak does it too (haven't played it yet, either). And even if you started at Zero, meet characters from Sky, Falcom did a good job introducing them. Sure you miss that hype of meeting them in a new game, watching how their stories continued, but realistically it's not that big of a deal if you just try to get into the series. Again, Falcom does an excellent job of introducing those characters and make you want to go back and check it yourself. Before trails, I was very picky about retro JRPGs, but the series changed me. And Cold Steel which is a pretty weak arc compared to the rest managed to do it. So i say put more trust into new players and the games themselves.
And the spoilers you might get aren't the end of the world in my opinion. And like you might catch a spoiler even if you play in release order like Azure clearly spoils which side wins in CS2, and that’s a big one kinda. Should we recommended people playing Azure and CS2 at the same time then? That's just silly.
I guess I'll offer a bit of a take that does favour the skippers? We'll see. I do think that if you can starting with Sky FC is ideal but I also think that Cold Steel 1 is also the 2nd best starting point.
Sky FC is obvious so I won't go into detail on it but Cold Steel 1 is still early enough into the series that you don't lose out on a whole lot of things that have happened prior (and Falcom does provide context regarding things that happened in Liberl/Crossbell that are relevant to Erebonia in each game) and as CS keeps going, you're filled in more on what happened outside of Erebonia. This comes at the cost of events that happen in CS that have ties to Liberl/Crossbell having less impact but the trade off is favourable enough that XSEED went ahead with localizing Cold Steel 1 and 2 after SC as FC/SC provided enough context that CS1-2 didn't fly completely over your head while SC and Zero/Azure's key plot points are still referenced. The Intermission with the SSS in CS2 also helps maintain interest on the player's part to go back and play Crossbell. Which happens to be my position as someone who has been playing the games on release (Sky FC, SC, CS1, CS2, Sky 3rd, CS3, CS4, Zero, Azure, Reverie, Dawnbreak). You zoomers being able to play the games in chronological order, back in my day we had to skip entire arcs!
Ultimately though it's up to the player. If they want to start anywhere but they know they're going to miss shit, more power to them. I'll still suggest either Sky FC or if that's too old, CS1.
Even if we disregard story, there's also an argument to be made in terms of gameplay.
Over time, new arcs have added several brand new features and Quality of Life additions to enhance the gameplay.
Playign through the games out of order might dampen your enjoyment of it. Especially if, disregarding story for a moment, you play the games within the same arc out of order.
Try going through Nord again in CS1 without the fast travel function of CS2 and you'll see what I mean.
I got into Trails in 2017 with CS1 and 2, then played Sky, then took a long break and started again from the Crossbell games, simply because I've never messed with fan translations. Now I'm resuming from CS3 and going in order. People getting into it now are lucky to have all the games available. Having the gaps filled in as you play out of order has some "aha" moments, but if I could go back I'd have started from Sky because you can experience the weight of every callback and returning character. I also get that CS1 might be a better introduction for people who haven't played many hardcore JRPGs before going back to the 2D ones once hooked. At least they're doing 3D remakes of the Sky games for the zoomers.
Fc no questions asked for the best experience.
You should start playing all of them immediately.
This video perfectly encapsulates my feelings entirely. I just don't understand why fans are considered toxic for simply wanting people to experience the story how it was intended. This literally never happens in any other form of media that has direct sequels.
That time period during KH3 was abysmal. People just hate committing to anything I guess. It's just common sense to me that if you want to get into something you start at the beginning. Especially if it's a series that connects over multiple games/books/anime etc.
The fanbase really needs to stop treating the Sky games as if they're these horribly ancient pieces of tech from an ancient civilization that are the worst games to ever exist. What game from that era (or hell even today) has a Turbo mode? That alone significantly reduces the amount of time spent on the more mundane aspects like backtracking and level grinding. I have to question if some of these fans even like Trails, or if they just like one very specific aspect of it. Long form storytelling is something that should be praised, especially when done insanely well like what Falcom has managed to do with freaking 12 (soon to be 13) of these things 😂
A wild Cyrus sighting? My lucky day!
But seriously, I played through Sky through Reverie over the past couple years and loved pretty much every minute ( please let Kevin be main protag in an Arteria game, Falcom ) but I can see how someone born this millennium can be unkind to the graphics in Sky, the gameplay is primo, even today. In fact, people were head over heels for Octopath Traveler a few years ago but I got pretty bored of how simplistic the combat was 50ish hours in and haven't been back yet.
TBF Sky did come out in like 2004, and 2011 for the west. In internet timeline might as well be the middle ages and 1800s respectively. But yeah, I see what you're saying, and I do agree.
In all honesty, the original Sky games didn't have Turbo mode. Heck, the original XSeed releases on PC didn't even have it. The feature was first introduced when Durante ported Cold Steel 1 to the PC and when fans mentioned the Sky games could really used that feature too, Sara Leen implemented it into the Sky games, around the time of the 3rd's release. (before that, lots of PC players used a cheat engine to simulate Turbo)
@@Erpy80 Interesting, good to know!
@@weaponsci a remake would def fix that specific issue if they do end up switching to 3D, I'm very curious to see how that would function. Especially the old orbment system.
I started the whole franchise with Cold Steel One. That worked pretty good until Cold Steel III. That is the game where all the previous chapters and protagonists and places come together again. Technically already with Cold Steel II. Without spoiling too much. After the credits there is a playable 3 hour epilogue and you start questioning yourself whi these characters are.
But in Cold Steel III the nods and connections to older games go ape. It started with a big Arc that puts Rean and his Party into Crossbell where Trails from Zero and Azure plays. And later it even goes into Trails in the Sky territory when you visit Liberl From Sky 1 to 3 with so many refrerences that you have the feeling you are missing too many things to follow up to. So what i did was... Stopped after Cold Steel III and started Trails in the Sky from 1 to 3.
Now currently i´m digging into Zero and Azure. After that i will watch a quick summary of III where i probably start to feel very nostalgic and then i finally after one and a half year break i can finish the saga with Cold Steel IV. 🤣
But references aside. The stories alone are worth digging through the old games. So many great stories so many awesome characters. The games also aged like wine and are still good even when 5 Games use an Engine with prerendered 2D Characters in a 3D Area.
For best story experience, start with Sky FC. If graphic matters much to you, start with Reverie/CS/Daybreak whichever you want, just do you, as long as you enjoy the game. But if you feel lost in stories because you start with later entries, just watch weapon’s ‘let’s talk about trails series’ Sky FC, SC, the Third, Zero and Azure for some input so you know what’s going on.
I started with FC on PSP and have to wait years for SC too came out on steam. Worth the wait.😄
Lol I appreciate the advertisement at least.
I don't think Twitter people know what gatekeeping is. A gatekeeper would not tell them the best way to enjoy something; a gatekeeper would, for whatever reason, tell them they should not play the games at all.
I am mainly a console gamer and started with FC late last year. Played in my potato laptop that literally dies in 5 minutes if not constantly plugged in and I had a great time. Currently on chapter 1 of Zero. I had this great little moment at the beginning of Zero when opening the first 3 chests. This moment would mean nothing to me had I not played the series.
Plus, a potential Trails fan is probably aware that the games build off of one another. Knowing that, unless it is absolutely a hardware issue, why start elsewhere but release order?
People that really want to start with Daybreak are probably better off starting waiting to see if the Sky games get remade. Especially those without PCs or that really want the entire series in the same console.
Yeah, I also started with Cold Steel 1 and the end of Cold Steel 2 felt like a good point to go back and play the Sky series, then the Crossbell games came out in the west and it just felt natural to play them before going back to Cold Steel. Just knowing all of those characters made CS3+4 so much better even when I had already forgotten some of the plotpoints of Sky FC by the time I went into CS3. Not every brain will remember every little detail. But you will remember when the game reminds you. Still have to finish Reverie, but I don't really like that as much as the other games from a gameplay and narrative point. It feels very disconnected, much like Sky 3rd. Pretty much a giant infodump to cross the bridge between the end of CS4 and the beginning of the next big arc. I don't really think we needed another game that centered around Class VII and the SSS. Not really feeling compelled to continue playing at the moment.
I started with the Sky arc. Sky the 3rd is still one of my favorite games for now. But the problem I see with just starting from one of the newer arcs is the fact that the later games in the arc will become another Avengers endgame with lots of older characters appearing for the big fight that will have 0 impact if you didn:t play the older games first. Cold Steel and Daybreak are apparently standalone enough to start with but only the first game in the arc. Cold Steel 2 is not that standalone actually because of reasons and those reasons cause confusion for some players who play the game without having played the first 2 arcs. It is kinda hard for new players to get into the series because of that, but it is a continued story that is told through all these games and especially a certain character from the first arc has their story told throughout the entire series. Trails is basically a light novel series divided into multiple parts in game format that tells one story. And it makes no sense to read a light Novel from the middle of the story. To be fair, I did that with Shield Hero volume 11 but it was the only Volume I had access to at the time. But still, most stories should be read from the start. It is just so much more rewarding than needing to go back after the first book anyway to know what is even happening. I do hope Daybreak gets people invested enough that they turn their gears and think to themselves that they have to play Sky now to get the whole story. Because having the whole story makes everything better.
Like I always say in this argument, Starting Trails anywhere other than with Sky, is like starting The Lord of The RIngs from The Two Towers... you could, you will enjoy it because the books are awesome, but the highs won't be as high for you and the lows will more easily grate at you. That is it. You will enjoy it, just not as much.
Yeah that's another good point. For most arcs the sequel(s) for sure will bring in important points from previous arcs. So you'll have to backtrack anyway.
I started at Cold Steel and that was fine in my opinion.
Obviously starting with Sky would be optimal but Cold Steel is good. I think Zero and Azure is alot harder to start from for the sole reason that they include Estelle and Joshua and Renne in their plot, so you could be a little lost with the characters.
Not sure about Daybreak, looking forward to playing that.
I'm definitely graphics snob, Cold Steel just looked more appealing than the others. If Sky gets remakes I'll play em tho
Fair, I guess
I'm on haitus for continuing the series atm after finishing every game up through CS4 (just gotten really busy finishing up my degree)
My two cents is that it is fine to start with the first game of an arc. you'll be eased into the world of Zemuria but you will miss refferences and miss out on some of the details on some plot points that started from earlier games. Its not the ideal play order.
If you can play Sky start with Sky FC. but if you say, only have a switch, Zero is a fine starting point even if you won't feel the full weight of some of the late game story events. You'll be told enough to at least be invested in it (even if the full payoff won't be felt). However I will put my foot down and say you do need to play every game prior to CS3 before playing CS3.
It is not ideal, but Zero is a much better starting point for Switch players than CS 3, 4 or Reverie. (Can't speak on Daybreak yet)
Are there really people who can defend with a straight face starting anywhere but the very beginning? It isn't even a "gatekeeping" thing, I don't follow anyone on Twitter or anywhere for that matter who's part of the "community". It's just back-asswards to me to jump into a decade+ long multi-layered, deeply intertwined story right in the middle.
Yep, quite a few. To those people, the suggestion to start at the beginning is akin to suggesting that people learn a new language in order to watch a single non-translated anime. "You really want to force the chore of someone watch 500+ hours of earlier games just so they can try a game they might be interested in? Gatekeeping!"
From this point of view, only the latest games are worth playing (because 3D graphics) and earlier games are treated as a chore forced on people. (like having to clean your room before you can go and play outside) Meanwhile the long-time fans who propose starting at square one consider the earlier games an enjoyable experience, so in their eyes, they're not forcing homework on new players, but rather experiences that can be just as charming and enjoyable as the later installments.
@@Erpy80 hot take:
Cold Steel 1, while I do love the game, fits the "chore" description way more than Sky FC for the simple fact that it follows a similar formula but is almost twice as long.
@@weaponsci Cold Steel III has a similar structure and I'd very surprised if that wasn't also true for Daybreak I. It's simply the way Falcom introduces the gameworld piece by piece. Zero was an outlier because it took place in a relatively small city-state rather than a larger country with several cities and villages spread all over the place, but Zero's approach of having a city-state that's open from pretty early on had its own downside (for both the writers and plenty of players) of the NPC-runs between plot events becoming insanely long, which can get a real pacing killer.
For whoever reading this. Dont make the same mistake as i did. Dont start somewhere else than sky fc. I started with Cold steel 1, i had fun, but I felt there was always something missing and about mid game, where they were constantly kept talking about some “bracers” i said enough and went to sky FC, it took some time eto adjust to the old style game, but now i am on Sky SC and i am loving it. I still dont understand, why i have to press button to confirm every single dialog line (honestly the only thing i hate), to the point my hand hurts already, but the story and characters are so fricking good. Start with SKY FC. End of story. Don’t kill the story for yourself!
Yeah it's a double edge sword. Trails is an investment like One Piece. Most people want instant gratification and Trails is not that. So every so often, you'll get a heap of new people asking "Do you I have to play the previous games to play the new one?" It's the most annoying question and it's so often asked.
My recommendation is to liken the Trails metaseries to Marvel comics. Each arc is it's own team. Sky, Azure/Zero, Cold Steel and Daybreak is like Avengers, Xmen, GOTG, Defenders. As an Xmen fan, that's where I started. But the Avengers came first and is referenced in Xmen. But I don't care about the Avengers enough to read it. My enjoyment comes from Xmen.
In the case of Trails, I played Sky FC didn't like it. I then played CS1 when it was released in the US and loved it. I played CS2 and then went back to Azure/Zero. I didn't finish the Sky trilogy until right before CS4 was released. I had a roundabout adventure with the series. When I played Zero, and Estelle & Joshua were introduced I had the same reaction as Lloyd and the SSS. "Who the hell are these fuckers?" For me that enhanced my experienced of Zero/Azure. And it made me curious as to why Estelle and Joshua were held in such high regard in the game. Sky FC was not my favorite but I powered through. Sky SC was incredible. Easily Top 5. But my Trails journey is uniquely my own and playing in this order did not lessen my experience.
Oh god, even Weapon is getting into this discourse.
I'm not gonna argue on it because my opinion is more or less the same as yours; but I'm also tired of this, it's been two weeks already and it's still going, way more than regular dramas in any case.
And yeah, much like kingdom Hearts, this discourse has already happened before and will continue to happen in the future, because the interconnectivity of the series is both its greatest strength and greatest weakness.
That last sentence though. Too true...
As much as zero ties into sky its such a mistake to start there i feel like
I find it very interesting to see your opinion on this matter considering my "weird" playing order. Because I started with Cold Steel 3/4, beat Sky 1, began Sky 2 (found enemies too obnoxious cause I started on Nightmare) and am about to beat Reverie. And I agree that Sky 1 is the best entry point. However, I will say that starting with Cold Steel 3 is "technically" possible. I don't recommend it now (after/while watching your playthrough of CS), but Cold Steel 3 gives enough Info about CS1/2 to not miss "too much". Was I onfused as f**k? Yeah, kind of. But I was more than capable of enjoying it. But I will say: You should DEFINITELY play Sky and Zero before Cold Steel 4 (or at the minimum watch a playthrough) because of some stuff and characters appearing in this game (CS 4 knowledge and it was actually too confusing for me to understand the CS4 plot at the time of my playthrough). And in terms of quality, starting with an early game (Sky 1) is not a problem in the slightest. I actually find Sky 1 to be the 2nd best game in the series (for now) with Reverie being my favorite. (I only dislike Sky 2 for now because I underestimated the difficulty of Nightmare and found it too frustrating, lol. Probably will continue it after Reverie though.)
Sky FC is a good challenge.
Even on Normal, it's more difficult than a lot of 16 and 32-bit RPGs.
Starting with cold steel 3 is crazy enough on its own. Sticking to your guns and continuing with CS4 is straight up mad.
It's good to know that you could find enjoyment by starting with Cold Steel III. That said, I'm on chapter 2 and I've been playing the games in order starting with Sky and I can confidently say CS III is not a starting point. The game shows you a ton of characters from the start expecting you to know them and I'd just not care the same way if I hadn't played at least CS I and II before. It's the first Trails game where I'm watching the callbacks carry the story this hard.
At the end of the day, the place to start is the place that gets you to actually play the games. If someone, for whatever reason, finds themselves at a point where they would never get around to playing if they had to start with Sky FC, then I would rather have them start the series at whatever point gets them to play, then never pick it up at all.
I wanna play them so bad but i dont wanna start with sky. Im torn between zero cs or db. Zero seems interesting tho but now im scared it will be a bad starting point ;-;. If its like kingdom hearts then jeez yeah no way i can play a later one. I was hoping trails would be more like yakuza. Ive played them all and its all one timeline but i could see myself still understanding those by themselves. But if its like kingdom hearts then its a no go haha
Of the remaining 3 "starter" games, I'd say Cold Steel 1 is the second best after Sky.
Start from the very beginning. Simple as. If you can't do that it's not my problem. lmfao
Yeah as I said, just don't hold it against the game lol
I personally wouldn’t compare Kingdom Hearts, especially 3 to the Trails series. The issue that many people had with KH wasn’t just that they only started with 3 it’s that they only played 1 and 2 and felt that the other titles were spinoffs because they weren’t numbered entries that were spread out across different platforms. Sadly this wasn’t the case a fucking Gameboy game is integral to the plot of Kingdom Hearts, a DS game is integral to the plot of KH and a freaking mobile game was integral to the plot of KH. This is such a bizarre decision that led to KH3 being convoluted and confusing. Sure they did try to remedy this with the remixes but it was too late. Not too mention KH was just made up along the wa. Trails isn’t perfect either since plans change but at least you know what you signed on for compared to KH
Sky FC.
It's one of the greatest JRPGs ever made.
If they had not gone the harem route, Crossbell would be better than Sky and Erebonia would be almost as good as its prequels.
Trails is like Yakuza in that you can understand everything by just playing the mainline games. Kingdom Hearts is a mess lol
In crossbell, i only unlocked 2 characters, Tio and Randy. I never felt the Harem issues others felt. So it was indeed my fav game.
After watching LPs i realised how much harem bait I missed and am happy I missed it haha.
I started with CS1 and I went in without knowing there were previous games. I found that out partway through and didn't mind some of the callbacks going over my head. Once I beat CS2 I did some research and watched LadyVirgilia's summaries for Sky and Crossbell before doing CS3.
That worked out very well and I felt like I more or less got everything important for the rest of the games.
With that being said, I would totally advocate for starting with FC. Summaries help with the big picture but you can easily miss the nuances without playing the actual games.
Not to mention the emotional charge that comes with EXPERIENCING characters and events rather than just knowing what went down from a summary. Zero's finale is one good example of Falcom taking emotional investment players built up over the course of several games and using that in a payoff. Summaries on TH-cam cannot replicate this sense of emotional investment, no matter how detailed they are.
@@Erpy80 100% agree with this. I've played every game in the series in order from Sky FC to Kuro 2, and while I loved Reverie as a grand farewell, and deeply love what Kuro no Kiseki brought to the franchise (Van is so relatable to me and is literally one of my favorite protagonists of all time) - I don't think anything will replace that feeling of Zero's finale. It meant so, so much to me and I *know* it wouldn't have felt the same if Zero was my first game in the series. And equally so, so many moments in Kuro and Kuro 2 hit me deeply because of my experiences with the previous games, that just wouldn't have mattered to me if I hadn't played them all.
And just to throw in my two Mira:
I think that starting with Kuro would be a mistake, just like starting with Zero would be a mistake, in terms of emotional payoff. It kind of reminds me of what people have said about starting with Cold Steel 3 in a way, where things start out fine, but as you get further and further in, you realize that you don't know these characters or these plot threads and while you can still kind of follow things along, certain moments that are meant to make you emotional instead make you go "huh, that's neat", and you miss out on a huge part of the Trails experience that way. A large part of it, for me, like you said, is the emotional investment that you get by actually playing these games, and I'd go as far as to say that missing out on that does the Trails narrative a huge disservice. And by Kuro 2, you'll want to go back and play the other games anyway, because you'll start to feel *really* lost, for spoiler-related reasons. Certain reveals in Kuro are related to Reverie, which are related to Cold Steel 4, and... well, you get the idea.
Idk, I guess my advice to anyone thinking about which game to start with, is to take a breath, and think about what you want out of this series. Do you just want to experience the newest-looking game because it has a character you like the look of, or the art looks neat? Then start with that game. But if you want to experience the Trails series properly, please play them in order. I got a little emotional just seeing Weapons' Sky FC footage, and I will tell anyone who knows about the Trails series that I'm a Crossbell native at heart. I know that city better than my own hometown, and it's like a second home to me. If you're anything like me, you'll think back on your Trails journey and be so glad that you played the games in order.
The games aren't going anywhere, so there's no reason to rush and try to 'catch up'. And if you're interested in the series because the idea of the "multi-game, long-running narrative" sounds cool, then definitely trust what a lot of people are saying here, and start with Sky FC. Of course Falcom will market every starting game in a new arc as a good starting point, because they want to make sales, and I don't blame them for that. But I really do feel like the only true starting point is Sky FC.
@@Erpy80 Oh, absolutely. Having played Zero and Azure after the fact, it's not even funny how much more I care about Lloyd and the rest of the SSS compared to having only seen a summary.
Frankly, if someone is seriously interested in starting the Trails series and they look at Daybreak and want to play it for as simple as a reason of "It looks cool" then I say go for it. Maybe it'll be cool enough to them for them to play older games as well, or maybe not. But I know for a fact that if instead I tell that person "No, don't play that new game that does look interesting to you, play this PSP game from 2004 and then 9 other games before it" then they're just not gonna touch the series at all.
Gagharv Trilogy : allow us to introduce ourselves
PS: I will see myself out 😂
Okay, so as someone who doesn't like the purist take on trails (who has also played every trails game... in release order)... I want to offer a kind of opposing view. this is gonna be a long one, but I promise, but given that this perspective was promised, but not... really provided by the video (that's fine, you do you Weapons), I'll do it myself ;).
In my opinion, you shouldn't let other people police your fun. You should play the game you want to play. If you want a genuine recommendation, I've provided that below (and it'll be the same as weapons, with more information on Daybreak specifically), BUT, if you're looking for an excuse to start on the newest game. You don't need one, play Daybreak, it's a great game, it's the start of an arc, you can just do it that way and it's fine. I've played it, and while I think it's literally the worst "arc-starter" to start on because of its story, I still think it works just fine without the full context.
Also, and this is the one place I really disagree with Weapons in this video, if you don't like the story, and want to trash the game... go ahead, if that makes you happy, do whatever it is you want to do. "Don't let people police your fun" *also* applies to reviews. You should never let a bad review stop you from trying something you want to try... and if you're on the fence, you probably shouldn't trust random bad reviews from twitter people anyways.
Okay, onto the topic of the video, recommended playing order. Weapons said it best, if you want the most information, to understand the full context of every game as you play it, there is but one way,
Start with FC, and play in release order. That will give you the intended experience and the most context to enjoy that experience.
In my opinion, in order, the best starting points after that, if you don't want to play 11 JRPGs before daybreak are, in order,
Cold Steel 1, Trails from Zero, and then Trails from Daybreak. You should ideally never start on a sequel, unless you really... really want to for some reason. Again, don't let me police your fun, but yeah, if you genuinely want a recommendation, that's mine as someone who has played all the games available with english translations (fan or otherwise) except Crimson Sin (Daybreak 2).
As for reasons:
Playing in release order is best for obvious reasons. Cold Steel 1 has a completely new main cast, and while it does have alot of references and returning characters, as every trails game after FC does, the story and most of what happens is pretty easily understood without the additional context.
Zero is worse for all the reasons Weapons gives in this video, so you can just reference that if you're wondering. I think it's better than Daybreak because technically, the main plot of the game and the main cast is still new, and doesn't require much past knowledge to appreciate, so you can still at least enjoy the central story, even if some of the significant side characters feel a little underdeveloped.
Daybreak... without getting into major spoilers, has a main story issue that makes it hard to recommend starting with. It is an arc starter, the characters are mostly new and you will mostly understand what's going on even without the additional context. HOWEVER, the main story of the game is deeply linked with events of past games in ways none of the other arc starters have, and I don't think the context that defines those events is adequately explored in Daybreak, so I *do* think you lose more than the other games.
I genuinely think there is basically no arguing any of these spots on this list. FC is objectively the best place to start, cold steel 1 is next, and zero and daybreak both have significant flaws as starting points but do technically work in a vacuum because of the new casts and stories.
Note, I may disagree with Weapons as to how much someone might lose by starting on a later game, but I do *not* disagree that you do lose something. The only way to get it all is to start with FC. I just don't think this is at all similar to Kingdom Hearts, which on top of having a ridiculously complex story, also has one continuous story with the same major characters. To me, the comparison to kingdom hearts is more like "don't start on Cold Steel 4, because it'll be like starting on Kingdom Hearts III". You do lose *something* by starting on anything other than FC, but you won't lose that much if you start at the start of any of the four arcs.
TL;DR Don't let people police your fun. Start where you want to start and if you don't like it because you picked a bad spot, that sucks, but if you wanted to start there, that's still fine... lesson learned :). If you want a genuine recommendation: Weapons has it right, you get the MOST by starting with FC.
Counter argument: would you start a book series on the 6th one? Of course you wouldn't. Threat the trails series the same way. If you can't, the series isn't for you, and you shouldn't feel ashamed to skip it entirely.
@@Javifaa Games aren't books. And even in the example of books, people start book series in the middle all the time... Do you think everyone who reads Discworld or the animorphs read all 30+ books in release order, starting from the beginning? I don't...
@@stefannelson5785 Discworld is closer to Ys than Trails. A better example would have been Malazan…
Wow, someone who's a Kingdom Hearts fan and becoming a Trails fan? Hooray I don't feel alone anymore. And I had flashbacks to this one video I saw a while ago that described the Trails series as, "a bullshit bootleg Kingdom Hearts."
In the case of Metal Gear Solid it’s one of those series where technically there is an order however the games are so self contained that barring MGS4 you can play them in any order. Think about it the first Metal Gear game was on the MSX2 in 1987 it was Japan only same with Metal Gear 2. So when Metal Gear Solid came out in 1997 nobody in the west knew what happened in those games so it was kind of basically background lore. It really wasn’t until after Metal Gear Solid 4 that Kojima started putting all the threads of the game together into one coherent (if nonsensical) plot. It also helps that gameplay is incredibly engaging and has a ton of depth.
A good way to summarize this would be like sequels in an action movie series technically there is a plot but if you don’t understand what’s going on you can still enjoy the action on screen. This not surprising as Hideo Kojima is a big movie fan and likes to design his games to capture that feeling.
I'm almost done w SC which means a remake will be announced soon.
I started with cold steel 1 because I was searching for games like persona 4. I didn't know trails or it's prequels . This was when cold steel 3 wasn't even localized.
Cold Steel was my first game. I do agree that some end scenes of cold steel 2 didn't make sense but that was when I discovered that sky and zero existed.
Now caught up to the series, sky fc is definitely the best area to start but I do agree cold steel can also be a starting point, just not the best.
Dawnbreak is a no no to start. Your basically spoiling the entire starting arc.
Yeah I guess I could've emphasized that more, but yeah I completely understand especially if you just didn't have the right consoles or whatever
just finished daybreak and i honestly think its better to start with sky sc then daybreak. daybreak very much expects you to know everything about all act 1. i think that the best starting point is sky fc but cs1 one is a good starting point, zero i don't think is a good starting point but its better then daybreak
Start with Trails Through Daybreak don't listen to anyone else.
Another game series like this is Xenoblade... if you skip to 3 you will enjoy it less than if you played 1 and 2 first especially the DLC which will flat out ruin the story of the first 2 for you.
True, though Xenoblade is slightly more digestible in this regard since there's only 3 games
I do think that the absolute best starting point is the first game. But the next best point (which is what I did, because I didn't know about the series as a whole) is cold steel 1. You can play CS 1 & 2 and then go all the way back to the beginning without getting your enjoyment hampered, aside from missing a couple references here and there (though you may be confused by that small bit in CS2). But you absolutely should not move past CS2 without playing the previous titles.
I'm gonna be burned at the stake for saying this. This might be the craziest take in the entire comment section:
I personally believe that as long as people understand the fact that there is some information they are going to miss by not playing the previous games, they can reasonably start with EVERY GAME BUT COLD STEEL 4 and REVERIE (Yes I just said that). PD: At least up to Reverie, I haven't played Daybreak but i'm 99% sure it also applies to that game as well.
To explain further, I'm not saying they are the IDEAL starting points if you want to UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING. That objectively would be Sky FC...
What I'm saying is, they are all great starting points to get a *feel* of the series (gameplay, characters, world, etc.), and from there hopefully they become invested enough to go back and play the other games, or at least read/watch a summary (which is also viable).
People seem to forget how much bloated the games actually are.
People will be lost for sure on some things. But, the games give enough context and are always paced to start the player from a starting point THEY can understand, and follow up on THAT game's main narrative.
The only exception I can think is CS4 because even with all the time that game uses up it's still not enough to fit all the references from previous games, much less explain to new players the terminology, world, why they should care about even a tenth of the cast, etc.
And Reverie is built on you already knowing stuff from 2 arcs and caring for those characters.
What ultimately matters is that people get started somewhere, and from there they can judge for themselves if they like the games or not.
Though definetly start at the begining of an Arc if possible lol
You’ve gained a subscriber once I found out you don’t bite heads off. I respect that, brother. I knew NOTHING about the series and when I saw Cold Steel 1 I liked the case and what I read in the back so I decided to play it and bought Cold Steel 2. When I learned there was more after CS2 I played the Sky games and watched the story of Sky 3, Zero, and Azure while waiting for CS3 to release. I don’t play PC so I couldn’t play Sky 3 and Zero and Azure weren’t out back then. Years later I FINALLY played Zero and Azure when they came out which was after CS 3 and 4. I just finished Reverie and now just waiting for Daybreak. Waiting for CS3 and 4 sucked lol and now we wait for Daybreak and the games after Daybreak
Also I agree with you. People can start where ever they want. However, I do recommend starting with Sky 1 or Cold Steel 1 and if you like it then play the rest. I also agree that Zero is the worst place to start when you compare it to Sky 1 and CS1. Ultimately people can do w/e they want. I just hope they play it and enjoy it
From a outside perceptive playing out of order may not seem like a big deal when you want to start with a game that seems to have new characters than the last. It looks like it could be a fresh start. Unlike Kingdom Hearts which mostly tells the story of Sora and games that don't go back to him.
I started from cold steel 1 and then went to 2. I have all the sky games and plan on playing them next before cold steel 3 and 4. I might play zero/azure but apart from the closing arcs of the characters from sky they are self contained. And while i do agree that starting from sky is probably the best, i liked the mystery of playing cold steel since if you played sky there are some things that are more obvious. Cold steel 1 was a great starting experience and made me want to play the franchise.
I started with the cold steel series (1-4) and then went back and played Sky series through Zero series, and it wasn't that bad. It really made me appreciate the story as a whole better because going back through though because you get that "oh this makes way more sense." I think if you're trying to get into the series and don't want to start with the old games (because of graphics) you should probably start with Cold Steel 1-2 (which is more modern than Sky and Azure) then go back to Sky and Zero. Then play Cold Steel 3 to present. Cold Steel 3, 4, and Reverie are like the start of Avengers Infinite War to Endgame. Whichever entry you start from whether its Sky or Cold Steel the first game is a slow burn. (I wouldn't start with Zero series) If you can get through those 2 games, I think your good. If you're into turn base gameplay I think all of them are pretty good even going back playing the old ones after the newer ones.
Yakuza is the same way
I definitely agree with starting with playing Sky first
For me personally as i was never even close to JRPG genre before i obly got myself in because of CS series because it felt more "safe" for me to experience. Which made me perceive things in entirly new light tho there were still a lot of things i missed and didnt get playing those games (at least I didint know about Osborne doing 180 after civil war)
My suggestion is to Pirate Sky FC and Cold steel 1. I dont see any reason to start with crossbell.
Cant comment about Day break.
If Sky turns you down, play Cold steel. If cold steel turns you down, maybe the game isn't for you.
You can buy the rest or even FC or Cold Steel 1 if you want to after playing enough of the games
I recommend watching story summary on TH-cam of each series then start at daybreak. When you finish daybreak and you want to go back to play the rest to get a more full experience you can do that. I did that when I stared cold steel 1. Watched a summary just to get me up to speed then after I beat cold steel I went back to previous ones when I had time.
I fully understand why people recommend to start with the Sky games. I personally bought Cold Steel I, just out of curiosity (it was my first Falcom game). II was just a hour or so in when I noticed in the comments on the forum for that game, that it was a part of a whole series, and that there where in fact 5 games before Cold Steel. After some thinking and looking around I finally decided to put Cold Steel I on hold and play the other games first. That was the best decision I ever made, and I am grateful I did that.
I have to be honest here - Jumping back from 3D to 2D perspective made me a bit hesitant. But at the end I was "what the hell, let's at least give it a chance". And the rest, so to say, is history. I played all the games in order (thank you guys from Geofront to give me the chance to do that), and I am really glad that I could make that journey.
Can you start the series at any other point. Yes of course, but you WILL miss out a lot. I agree that Cold Steel III, Zero and Reverie are about the worst points to start these series. Just like a lot of other people for me it's not about being a purist or a dedicated fan, but after having so much fun with the games and the complete story, I just wish that everyone gets that same great experience as I have gotten. I just feel sad if someone misses out on it, gets confused and is not capable to enjoy the series to the fullest.
As a side note: I don't know much about the Kingdom Hearts series, because I am a PC gamer, and those games where never released on the PC. There are a few game series that (although in no way as strong as the Trails series) are a bit more connected. To give a example: The Atelier series from Gust. These games come in several "arcs" that play in the same region/environment, and have re-appearing characters. You have the Arland series (4 games), Dusk series (3 games), Mysterious series (4 games) and the Secret series (4 games). You could add the (non Atelier) Blue Reflection games to it, but so far there are only 2, so it's more a first game and a sequel, so it does not really count. It is recommended to play these games at the start of an arc. Sure - You can start somewhere in the middle, but you will encounter people or/and situations that refer back to the previous games (example: in Atelier Firis you come across some weird Alchemist very early in the game that is directly recognizable for players of the previous game).
I agree that narratively Sky is the ideal place to start but if we keep telling everyone they MUST start there and not with Daybreak then nobody is going to buy it. That’s just bad business. You can easily enjoy the series starting with a new arc and going back to Sky later if you want. It’s not the best choice but if we want new fans to buy the games and for this series or future Legend of Heroes series’ to continue then we have to stop insisting people start with a 20 year old game.
I have enough problems talking anyone into playing this series, that if I can get them to play Cold Steel at least, I will take the win. From the conversations happening in my corner of the fandom who've played Daybreak in Japanese, it seems like that's a place to start as well. Zero would be the only one I don't want to recommend, although when Zero came out I saw several reviewers who successfully used that as their entry point, so *shrug*. I guess my thing is people who are going to dock any game for not explaining all the details are going to be like that irregardless of if the series is long running or not. There's a huge trend of people who don't want to engage their brains at all and read subtext. (PS As a Western fan who had to play Cold Steel I-III before either of the Crossbell games were available in English in any form, I had to play out of order, and it didn't diminish my experience. Even knowing some Crossbell spoilers could not explain the depths of ridiculousness those games got to. It's about the experience, not the twist.)