Any particular game I should pick up? I'd rather not buy the entire series only to find out that it isn't my thing.
Concerning Yakuza, I would just get 4, the latest one to be released in English. It only has one city (unlike the last two games) but in my opinion feels like it has the most variety out of the games.
If you want depth, interactivity, and especially authenticity of the world from a Japanese game, you're probably never going to find anything similar to the Looking Glass lineage, but
Yakuza does accomplish its own feeling of depth and authenticity.
It's not really a systemic game where you can pick up and investigate everything, but Sega went to huge lengths to make the world feel authentic. The games basically take one specific district of Tokyo (or other Japanese cities) and reproduce as much of it as the PS3 can handle. You can walk into a shop that actually exists at that location in Japan, and buy its real products as health items or whatever. It really tries to get you to "know" the city as the game progresses. It weaves all this into a classic-style gangster storyline.
In this game there is a shitload to do between gambling, dating characters based on real Japanese models and porn stars, fighting in pits, training fighters, running a bar, or just getting a drink at a real bar.
I've only played fighting games for a few minutes at a time before, so I've never really had the chance to get into them. My nature as a gamer, however, is to fiddle with the gamey systems and see how far I can stretch them. In a way, that's what I'm trying to get at with this thread: I want games that, when I push them, seeing how far I can go, they've got a lot for me to mess with. The mark of a good shooter is ultimately how far you can push it--how encounters can change based on your weapon loadout, movement, and enemy AI. It's why games like FEAR and Halo are excellent; they've got a nice variation of weapons, level spaces, and AI, so the experience can be different every time.
Instead of learning 'how' to play, and then playing that way, and only that way, as you progress, a good shooter is one that's ultimately a blank canvas for the art of combat.
Fighting games in general tend to be good at this, just with a smaller set of tools. In my personal opinion
Soul Calibur nails the best balance between depth and accessibility, with each character having hundreds of moves that all work in a somewhat understandable system. I've been told that
Virtua Fighter is similar, but I haven't had time to get into it.
Street Fighter is also seen as very deep despite its relatively small move pool.
May I also suggest
Marvel vs Capcom? It's a very unbalanced game, but if you want combat that you can mess around with and stretch, then MvC arguably excels at this more than most other fighters. It's almost deliberately made so that you can break the fuck out of it.
If you want balance, I personally suggest
Street Fighter III: 3rd Strike.
I see the Souls games have been covered. Good times.
Friend, let me welcome you to the glory of Lord Matsuno.
Final Fantasy Tactics was a landmark title, filled with secrets, nuance, and brutal painful difficulty to be mastered by cunning (till chapter 4). Dozens of classes, over a dozen stats, with terrain, gear layout, skill choice, placement, gender, class, even zodiacal signs of the combatants having an influence on every move. It's on PS1 if you have a PS2.
Vagrant Story is his magnum opus. Dark, deep, difficult...with masterful cinematics, a magnificient soundtrack, a plot that doesn't assume you read Image in the 90s, and an oppressive, exhilirating atmosphere of danger, adventure, and empowerment that never leaves. Oh right, the ambition:
The best thing about this is once you draw it within your mind and master it, you can focus to your liking on a few strengths to carve your way beyond obstacles. I rocked 2-handed maces thru the last 2/3 of the game, which some say is suicide. I made it work by working the systems. Elegant and purposeful, the way complex game systems should be.
Final Fantasy XII Flawed, as it was taken from under his and his crew's control midway, but the intelligent, subtle, epic scope of his design still shines thru.
Boom. Right here. I guess you could also add
Tactics Ogre here. The best version of that though is for the PSP. The best version of FFTactics is for the PSP or iPad.
Specifically concerning the
Tactics games, they're probably some of the best strategy/wargames on consoles. The most similar PC equivalent might be
XCOM or
King's Bounty. Turn-based, square grid. The party management is where it get's addictive. Each character can be cycled through a bunch of classes called "jobs" in which they learn different abilities. It starts to legitimately feel like managing an army or at least a large unit, soldier-by-soldier. On top of that, as the previous poster said, the game also has a nice, thick, mature storyline. The PSP/iOS version of FFT has improved translation over the PS1 original.
Vanquish Story is mostly deep for its combat. It's a very weird semi-real time system with stuff based on risk factors, location-based damage, combo chains, and what have you. The game's combat centers around weapon crafting. All this is put into the structure of a one-character isometric dungeon crawl. The story is similar to FFT in its town. You can get it on PSN.
Generally, Matsuno's style is oddly "western" compared to other JRPGs. I'm not sure how much of that really comes from WRPG influence though. He's admitted that he still regularly logs into
Ultima Online though. The stories he writes in his games are much more
The Witcher and much less... well...
Final Fantasy.
On the subject of that western influence,
about Dark Souls and Demon's Souls...
Those games aren't really deep in terms of their worlds, more in terms of their mechanics. Compared to other Japanese games they are surprisingly objective and systemic when it comes to the action combat. Checking the Wikis just shows you how many strategies people think up for defeating each boss. You can permanently kill almost any NPC in
Demon's Souls, no matter how important they are to the running of the game. The guy running the blacksmith shop in the main hub that you kinda need to sell you health items and repair your armor? You can kill him outright or just make him hostile towards you for the whole game. It doesn't care.
Both games also feel surprisingly compete for how little "assets" they use. They truly feel like every mechanic and character is there because they need to be there. They really do feel like efficiently made low-budget games.
Lastly,
how familiar are you with Metal Gear?
If you want something with depth and interactivity I would mainly suggest you
Metal Gear Solid 3 and
Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake. The latter is the MSX game, not the NES game.
MG2 is fucking incredible for a console game that came out in 1990. If you played MGS1, the game is basically MGS1 eight years before MGS1 and rendered in pixels. In my opinion, it get's the same mechanics across better and ends up feeling a bit more free-form for it. The tools and solutions you use in order to solve problems in that game feel... less video gamey and more authentic to the world.
MGS3 is where Kojima really tried to switch up
Metal Gear and make it more like a real, open stealth game. I still haven't played Thief but I imagine MGS3 brought things slightly closer to that game. In it you can sense an attempt to create a dynamic world where bases and guards worked systematically. If a guard spots you and you shoot his radio, he can't call in an alarm. If he goes missing for around 30 seconds a search party comes looking for him. If you blow up all the food storage in the game, the guards start complaining about their hunger and will greedily gobble up any food you throw out.