Support NeoGAF

[Trust me. I'm a PhD]

I usually always do release order, just based on our medium's habit of controls and gameplay getting more refined with new iterations. Sometimes doing it chronological order has you playing a more refined control scheme first and then going back to older set ups that can piss you off sometimes... just my experience

 

[Doctoglethorpe]

It depends on the type of prequel it is. If its very straight forward "this happened first" sort of clinical prequel, then may as well play it chronologically. But if its a prequel thats seeped in references and connections that only make sense in release order, then they should be played that way. To quote George Lucas, its like poetry, it rhymes.

 

[Jac]

I usually always do release order, just based on our medium's habit of controls and gameplay getting more refined with new iterations. Sometimes doing it chronological order has you playing a more refined control scheme first and then going back to older set ups that can piss you off sometimes... just my experience

Elder Scrolls is very much like that. Its hard to go back to Morrowind after Skyrim.

 

[Pizza]

release order

would you watch star wars from 1 to 6 ?? no.. you watch it from original trilogy then the prequels..

watching it from 1 to 6 is like eating a steak welldone...

Oops. Had my gf start with the first three and then move on. I mean, the star wars story was pretty much farts once the prequels were made, so you may as well get Darth Vader's terrible backstory out of the way and it really lets the fact that JarJar caused episodes 4-6 by putting palpatine in charge sink in because it's hard to gloss over, since it's the only plot you're presented.


And wouldn't callbacks to the first-developed game/movie just work in reverse? Like, if monsters university (haven't seen it still somehow) is talking about putting things back where they came from or so help me, then the bit when you're watching monsters Inc and they're singing it and making a much bigger deal about that joke would be that much sillier?


Idk I generally assume developers won't spoil things in prequels, so why wouldn't you watch the hobbit trilogy first? Unless you somehow can't play a very polished game and then it's forbearer after. unless the first game was crap compared to the second, I think chronologically is way cooler for a virgin playthorugh

 

[……forgetit]

Always release order. Chronological can ruin some surprises in earlier games.

 

[gdt]

Always release order. It's not even a choice really.

Chronological if you want for replays.

 

[NJDEN]

I play in release order, although playing Reach followed by Halo Combat Evolved was an easy choice (especially with the anniversary edition).

 

[jroc74]

Reading a thread about Metal Gear Solid 5 now....there is no way I would play that series in chronological order...

No way.

 

[Tohsaka]

Always release order.