The lights are on
Two editors enter, one editor leaves. Then the other editor leaves. In between, they talk about whether or not going back to older games to experience everything a franchise has to offer is worth your time.
Tim Turi takes the pro side of the debate, Adam Biessener the con in this companion video to the written piece in the April issue of Game Informer. For the first time ever, Dead Space novels are deployed as a concept as someone tries to make a point in good faith.
Which side do you fall on? Do let us know in the comments. Unless your point is that you really need to play Master of Orion III to understand what that series is about. Because nobody should ever play MOO III, under any circumstances.
Email the author Adam Biessener, or follow on Twitter, and Game Informer.
**BRAAAHHHH**, I want to play MOO III for no reason now. Well, not really.
Personally I fall a little bit on both sides of the debate.
If there is an over-arching narrative like Metal Gear, or as Tim pointed out, an evolution in gameplay like in the GTA or Super Mario series then it is totally worth your time to go back to old games.
If the series has undergone a significant reinvention; Prince of Persia for example, then I don't feel it's very important. That isn't to say one shouldn't play older games in a such a series at all though. While the '08 PoP game is quite different than the Sands of Time games and you don't need to play them to get full enjoyment out of it, Sands of Time and its sequels are still excellent games that should be enjoyed by all.
In the still shot of the video it looks like Tim wants to get the hell outta there.
Haha, great debate guys.